[gardnr]

I didn't go to law school either. I definitely don't want cops patting me down because someone does something illegal sometimes in an area that I also happen to be in sometimes.

It does not build PC anymore than walking in a "high crime area". It wouldn't stand in appellate courts. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/528/119/case.htm...

[PeanutCurry]

I may have phrased that poorly, I didn't mean that you would be searchable for being in the area. I meant that you would be searchable for being witnessed picking or carrying mushrooms in the area which is very different from your example of simply walking through a high crime area.

[gardnr]

Looking at your original comment I see that message clearly now. I still wouldn't want that to constitute PC. What if I had a brown bag full of non-psychedelic mushrooms? The cops would roll up on me and search me? Worse yet, what if I inadvertently picked a psychedelic mushroom, not knowing what is is and telling myself I would ID it with a spore print at home later. Now I'm looking at prison time? I don't want my taxes to go to keeping those cases in prison.

We've kind of gone off on a tangent from the original article which I am OK with. It will be a hard sell for me to agree to widening the definition of what constitutes PC. From my basic understanding being in a place or doing something is the definition of circumstantial evidence.

I also just realized that I am biased in this conversation because I believe that they should be legal. If you read the studies linked from https://clusterbusters.org/ the potential physiological medical benefits have been shrouded from study by the international agreements that were fabricated by agenda driven politics: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJlqsdezhhk

To summarize:

1. Old guy was poaching. Nice story and all but there was a sign.

2. No I do not want to expand the definition of what constitutes PC

3. I have bias in this conversation because I think mushrooms should not be categorized as an illegal drug.