This war on drugs crap is turning innocent men into criminals. I bet that shop keeper wouldn't sell to a minor, but I have no doubt illegal drug dealers will. Which is exactly where anyone wanting to experience salvia will have to turn.

Take one look over at Salvia Trip and you'll see salvia users (and sellers) are not bad people! Well, some sellers are - in my book, if they sell anything stronger than 60x, then they're only going to help getting it banned. Remember, buy your salvia from someone responsible!

Do they charge bar owners in Nebraska for selling jager bombs and beer? The intent of the 22 year old college student at a bar on Friday is to get drunk or put different 'to buy substances that will induce an intoxicated condition.' Similarly the bar owner is selling these substances with the knowledge that they will likely be ingested for the purposes of inducing an intoxicated condition.

This is ridiculous.

I was going to add my 2 cents but Shame and anon both hit it squarely on the head. Well said both of you! This ridiculous war on drugs is just that, ridiculous.

Go bust a meth lab you cop pussies.

Section 28-421 of Nebraska law specifically exempts alcohol from the statutes that Firoz is being charged with.

I know, I know!

Seriously... where did it go? and who are these fascist folks pretending that they have authority to regulate every facet of human existence including what you choose to put into your own body?

Except the bar tender has a very expensive license to sell alcohol as an intoxicant. ARGH!

The law in Nebraska says it bans the sale of any substance that a person intends to use to get "intoxicated" (with alcohol specifically exempted).
It looks like it's an early drug war "catch all". As best I can tell, no one has EVER been prosecuted in Nebraska under this law.
The part that gets me the most? The local police department read the newspaper article, then researched their best to come up with a crime they could charge my client with because they "KNEW" there had to be something illegal about it. I find that part chilling.
SusanK

The Nebraska legislative crime needs to be prosecuted as racketeering- criminal mercantilism for protecting alcohol.

The judge needs to go to prison, along with much of the judiciary for tolerating these unconstitutional statutes.

http://freedomofmedicineanddiet.blogspot.com/2008_08_01_archive.html

That's awesome!! Throw his ass in jail. He knew exactly what he was selling and what it was for. Don't try to insult everyone's, including the legal system's, intelligence by pretending not to know what salvia is for. IT IS USED TO GET HIGH, plain and simple. He was probably one of the jokers who sell salvia under the guise of "incense". Yeah, right, we're all believing that one.
Good going Nebraska coppers!

"While there may be others who potentially might be caught up in some confusing terminology contained in these two statutes, Mr. Christian Firoz does not appear to be one of them."

The judge is intentionally misinterpreting the argument the defense is making. Christian Firoz knew that the salvia was being used for intoxication. He was not confused about that. However, what Firoz's attourney was claiming was that people are confused about the law.

The judge order reads like this:

"The case law from both the United States and Nebraska Supreme Court clearly supports defendant's assertion that certain criminal statutes can be "void for vagueness". But the Nebraska Supreme Court has qualified who may assert such a claim --- who has the "standing" to assert such a claim ---by repeatedly setting forth that a person who wishes to challenge a statute as "void for vagueness" must not engage in conduct clearly prohibited by the questioned statute."

Who the hell would challenge a statute other than a person being prosecuted for it? If a person is not allowed to challenge a statute because they are guilty, then that goes against the principle of "innocent until proven guilty".

Is the Nebraska Supreme Court being constitutional in qualifying who may challenge a statute and who may not?

Coffee is imbibed to get high, particularly espresso.

Coffeeshop owners know this.

It is not specifically allowed either, according to Nebraska state law ... no different from Salvia.

Should we fear for our Nebraska Starbucks next?

I am all for freedom of choice. Repeal these ignorant laws!

Were I this man's laywer, I'd respond to this by immediately filing charges against all the pharmacys, resteraunts, grocery stores and bars in the state. In fact, if Frioz is convicted, it would provide precedent to push those charges through and either expose the major flaw in the law, or turn the whole state's judicial system into a circus.

I would contest whether the substance produces an intoxicated state. What are the criteria for such a thing?

Intoxicated definition:

1. To stupefy or excite by the action of a chemical substance such as alcohol.
2. To stimulate or excite: "a man whom life intoxicates, who has no need of wine" Anaïs Nin.
3. To poison.

Salvia is none of the above, therefore not an intoxicant. It is also in no way recreational. It is an aid to meditation and spiritual exploration.

As stated above however, substances such as caffeine, kava, tobacco, diet pills are likely illegal by definition as intoxicants.