Time to Stock Up?

[tallstraw]

PO is going to expand. For research purposes.

Do you think this will drive price down? Yeah this will make the market scarce and pricey in the immediate but shortly after.. It should be a staple of profits for BA and he'd probably buy and sell more as the available selection of ph's dwindle, and what really works will be bought more and more?

[Cobalt]

I'm more of a picture guy for guides. I was thinking of making a PDF file you all could just download and reference.

[weekend]

I'm more of a picture guy for guides. I was thinking of making a PDF file you all could just download and reference.

that's the move!

[BBG]

Do you think this will drive price down? Yeah this will make the market scarce and pricey in the immediate but shortly after.. It should be a staple of profits for BA and he'd probably buy and sell more as the available selection of ph's dwindle, and what really works will be bought more and more?

I doubt it'll drive prices down. You're basically funding for new chemicals. Like the oximes for example.

[O.N.]

The problem is that no one really knows. there are some in the industry that are fearful it will occur immediately, and there are some banking on 30 from signature.

I dont think there will be a grace period if it is being called a drug of xx class etc.

Thats like saying we have banned PH and they are dangerous drugs with many bad effects on health etc etc but you can still buy them for the next 30 days.....lol

[tallstraw]

...it happened with supedrol didn't it? What would make this any different?

BBG what is there seriously left to do, is the book of anabolics seriously that large lol? I think it'll get cheaper, time will tell.

[BBG]

There just is no grace period. As soon as it becomes law, aka the Prez signs it, immediately everything that is on that bill is illegal. PHF isn't even selling off the stuff on the bill. They are just getting rid of it. Not worth the risk to them.

[WesleyInman]

You have to remember the implications of EX POST FACTO LAW.

U.S. Constitution at Article 1 Section 9 Clause 3.

An ex post facto law (from the Latin for "after the fact") or retroactive law, is a law that retroactively changes the legal consequences of acts committed or the legal status of facts and relationships that existed prior to the enactment of the law. In reference to criminal law, it may criminalize actions that were legal when committed; or it may aggravate a crime by bringing it into a more severe category than it was in at the time it was committed; or it may change or increase the punishment prescribed for a crime, such as by adding new penalties or extending terms; or it may alter the rules of evidence in order to make conviction for a crime more likely than it would have been at the time of the action for which a defendant is prosecuted. Conversely, a form of ex post facto law commonly known as an amnesty law may decriminalize certain acts or alleviate possible punishments (for example by replacing the death sentence with life-long imprisonment) retroactively.


Generally speaking, ex post facto penal laws are seen as a violation of the rule of law as it applies in a free and democratic society. Most common law jurisdictions do not permit retroactive criminal legislation, though some have suggested that judge-made law is retroactive as a new precedent applies to events that occurred prior to the judicial decision.

Although the law changes, legal possession after the bill is passed can easily be argued in Court to be shown as retroactive punishment, which in turn is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. It will be of extreme difficulty for the US to attempt to criminalize people who purchase products legally and then they are banned and they possess them in their homes. They committed no crime and at that time, there was no intent to break a law, since no law existed. Intent is imperative in the commission of a "crime".

Also, we need to look at mere possession. How would they gather "possession"? One must wonder, would a judge in any right state of mind, file a search warrant for a product that was purchased legally, with the Intent to use? This would be a lawsuit and make it's way to the Supreme Court and they know that. This violates every Constitutional Law possible. Mind you , if you were driving around with them, etc..this might make its way to arrest you if you were pulled over with them, or if your house was searched for "other" reasons, but again, with a good Attorney, this would be dismissed under Ex post facto law.

The other issue is, lets say the Government gets a list of people who purchased something "legally" before a ban. One would want to show, why they have this private information that is a Constitutional violation for them to obtain, since no crime was committed. Second, lets say Judge John Doe gives a warrant to search my house, because I ordered a lot of 20 Prohormones, 2 days before the ban. Lets say I sold those "legally" and had nothing at my residence, and Johnny Fucking law shows up to "serve justice" and rips my house apart and finds nothing. Guess who is getting sued on the civil level and guess who is creating enough roller coaster effect that this is going to cause an issue for the entire Justice system since the Media is involved.

Just ordering a prohormone "legally" does not constitute enough evidence to facilitate a search warrant, since there is no evidence that you still maintain possession of those products prior to the ban. And no federal wiretap would be legal to obtain, since the basis of the "crime" was actually not a crime, rather a legal purchase.. Any Judge who wants to keep his career and his State and Federal Govt from being sued in Civil Court won't go 10,000 feet from such a case. Mind you, the U.S Gov't , DHS and many other agencies are already illegally wiretapping the majority of American's Emails, internet and telephone conversations, but this does not make it legal, and the fact the state uses terms like "anonymous informant, or State secret" cannot be utilized, if their is a crime being suspected of being committed. Meaning if you suspect a federal agency has committed a crime, then at that point, those terms become null and void.

There is alot more to this, then what appears on the surface. A good Attorney is the first and most important thing you should obtain if you find yourself in this situation at any time. Do not speak to Law Enforcement EVER minus an Attorney. They are not there to help you, even in a simple prohormone possession case, don't be fooled. Modern day L.E serve agenda's of politicians and corrupt agencies in situations like this. Food for thought everyone.

[Cobalt]

Such wisdom, its great.

[Turbo6GN]

They are intent on destroying the market, not punishing the consumer.

This ^^^ once again. "Johnny Fuckin' Law" isn't coming for your Stano and Epi. Everyone calm down.