Cesspool University students prove they can't be trusted even with baked goods!

[Ronin13]

I think he meant

No to LSD
Yes to MDMA( ecstasy for those of you with less drug knowledge)
No to Meth
Yes To Mushrooms
No to Herion

No to LSD? That's not very liberal of him....

[Rucker61]

No to LSD? That's not very liberal of him....

Not for unsuspecting sharing, no

[RMAC757]

Kind of a difference there... alcohol is metabolized and out of the system much more swiftly than THC. Also, most jobs don't test for the presence of alcohol, but do for the presence of THC. Furthermore, drugging someone is quite a bit different to spiking the punch. As I stated earlier, I know people who are allergic to cannabis, I have heard of, but know of no one who is allergic to alcohol... Anaphilaxys (sp?) is a very serious thing, BTDT. Aside from that, again, like I said earlier, ingested THC packs a more potent punch than smoked, and no surprise one girl went to the ER with an anxiety attack. Some know on here, I'm waiting to get on a Sheriff's Dept., had this happened to me my chances would be shot to hell... that's messing with people's livelihood, not just a "harmless" prank. Both are wrong, but there isn't much of a comparison between lacing food with pot and spiking the punch in terms of long term. Of course spiking the punch could lead to underage intoxication, DUI, etc. So there is the immediate aftermath in both cases, but pot has more long term issues.

A little presumptuous ?

[merl]

an update, 18 felony counts for one of em. other hasn't been formally charged yet

http://www.timescall.com/news/longmo...suspended-from

a conviction on any of these would mean no firearms for life. Hope they get a good plea offer....

[Teufelhund]

Dosing someone without their consent, regardless of the substance used, is unethical and should carry consequences for the perpetrators. Felony conviction and the resulting, permanent effects, however, is undue punishment and hardly commensurate with the crime.

[Kraven251]

Dosing someone without their consent, regardless of the substance used, is unethical and should carry consequences for the perpetrators. Felony conviction and the resulting, permanent effects, however, is undue punishment and hardly commensurate with the crime.

Not to down play what happened, but I don't think there was any intentional malice, just some really bad judgment. No one was seriously injured, so there is that as well. I do think these kids should have to pay for the hospital bills for the people that ended up in the ER and get to perform copious amounts of community service and some nasty probation, but I don't think a felony conviction is what these kids need. Though if they violate the terms of their probation/community service requirements, fuck em.

[SideShow Bob]

Ages 19 & 21 are not kids. You are considered an adult at 18, act like it, or suffer the consiquenses of your actions.
I bet that most of "you people" that are proponents of leniency would be singing a different tune if one of the victims of this "Prank" were your son, daughter or wife and they got into a serious injury accident while driving home from a college class after eating those brownies.

[merl]

Ages 19 & 21 are not kids. You are considered an adult at 18, act like it, or suffer the consiquenses of your actions.
I bet that most of "you people" that are proponents of leniency would be singing a different tune if one of the victims of this "Prank" were your son, daughter or wife and they got into a serious injury accident while driving home from a college class after eating those brownies.

I would be singing a different tune if ANYONE had been injured. fact is that nobody was and the act was done without intent to cause harm (making an assumption on the second part)

[Kraven251]

Ages 19 & 21 are not kids. You are considered an adult at 18, act like, or suffer the consiquenses of your actions.
I bet that most of "you people" that are proponents of leniency would be singing a different tune if one of the victims of this "Prank" were your son, daughter or wife and got into a serious injury accident while driving home from a college class after eating those brownies.

That is the point, no one got hurt. I would still be pissed, but I wouldn't be out for blood. I would want them to take responsibility for their actions, but I still do not see a reason for them to eat a felony conviction. And 19 & 21 are still kids, legally adults yes, but still kids with bad judgment. You asked us to take the side of the parent of the victim...how about looking at it from the perspective of the parents of the "perps."

[SideShow Bob]

I would be singing a different tune if ANYONE had been injured. fact is that nobody was and the act was done without intent to cause harm (making an assumption on the second part)

Not injured ? How many victims needed to be hospitalized ? Reread the OP's link. I would call that injuries.