Sciencemadness Discussion Board

Purity Of Ebay Nitroethane?

chem50 - 9-11-2014 at 10:08

Hi guys i want to know if this nitroethane on ebay is pure in peoples opinion here?

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1L-Tip-Blender-Feilhilfe-Nitroetha...

I know its impossible to say for sure but has any of you ordered nitroethane directly from a nail and beauty store on ebay?

Also whats the best way to test the purity of nitroethane? like you can put nitric acid with copper and observe the reaction.

This is for completely legal purposes in my country nitroethane is not a scheduled chemical and is legal for sale as im not in the USA.

Cheers guys :cool:

elementcollector1 - 9-11-2014 at 10:21

Oh? And what country are you in?
More information please, it's going to take us a while before we trust you on such a topic.

JAVA - 9-11-2014 at 10:36

There is a thread on the german site about this article, it's fake:
Kann das Nitroethan sein?

Sad story: Gittemaus is accused for the synthesis of illicit drugs. However, he was innocent. The police didn't find anything in that direction, in addition the test was a false positive test for amphetamine. It was the end of their chemistry hobby.

This 100% nitroethane is (probably) fake and I wonder that they mention that this is still pure nitroethane. The police seems to be uninterested in catching the real criminals. It's illigal to sell fake articles but they don't do anything. :(

Scr0t - 9-11-2014 at 13:06

2-3 years back this supplier did indeed sell real nitroethane in their product. It was labelled as 98% IIRC.
They have changed the pictures since then with plastic bottles without labels and with the 100% claim in the description.
I can't speak for what they're currently offering though, you'll just have to suck it and see.

A different supplier years ago sold a similar product as nitroethane but that turned out to be acetone.

aga - 9-11-2014 at 14:02

It's an old, old addage:

"If it seems too good to be true, it isn't true"

MrBlank1 - 9-11-2014 at 16:05

JAVA : anymore info on that case? I have, how could we say, "a new-found interest in these type of cases".

chem50 - 9-11-2014 at 16:40

Appreciate all the replies :)

To elementcollector - im in a EU country that does not forbid the sale of nitroethane. Im sure you will know that nitroethane is not illegal in the majority of the EU. Im looking for around 100ml of nitroethane not a gallon lol.

Now im thinking the only real way to get 100ml of real nitroethane is to synthesize my own. Ive checked most of the synthesis methods online and the only one that really looks doable with my current chemistry knowledge is the sodium ethyl sulfate and metal nitrite method.

And yes ive hit another brick wall! i cant seem to find sodium ethyl sulfate! any ideas?

HgDinis25 - 9-11-2014 at 16:43

Quote: Originally posted by elementcollector1  
Oh? And what country are you in?
More information please, it's going to take us a while before we trust you on such a topic.


You need more information to give him a piece of knowledge? You need to trust him to tell him if Nitroethane is 100% pure or not?

chem50 - 9-11-2014 at 17:10

Quote: Originally posted by HgDinis25  
Quote: Originally posted by elementcollector1  
Oh? And what country are you in?
More information please, it's going to take us a while before we trust you on such a topic.


You need more information to give him a piece of knowledge? You need to trust him to tell him if Nitroethane is 100% pure or not?


Exactly mate :) and from what ive heard nitroethane isn't even illegal in the USA! watched yes but not technically illegal. Again this is just what ive heard as im not in the US. In the country where i am right now part of the EU its for sure not illegal even fisher.co.uk stock it! although again thats a full liter.

You by any chance know any legitimate places to find sodium ethyl sulfate?

There was a ebay seller who stocked nitroethane i came across them sometime last week but they seem to have no active listings now.

[Edited on 10-11-2014 by chem50]

Scr0t - 10-11-2014 at 02:00

Listings of nitroethane come and go on eBay but you can often contact the seller and they're happy to sell their unlisted products. A polish supplier comes to mind.

Or just wait until they or others re-list it and they will do that eventually.

JAVA - 10-11-2014 at 08:55

Quote: Originally posted by MrBlank1  
JAVA : anymore info on that case? I have, how could we say, "a new-found interest in these type of cases".


What do you like to know exactly ?

I didn't buy the product, but I do know that you can make a few mL of it. The problem is that the nitrite anion is a ambident nucleophile that mostly attack with with it's oxygen atoms, instead of the lone pair of nitrogen. Aprotic solvents like DMF, THF,.. might help to increase the yield if the bromoethane doesn't react with the solvent (like in DMSO).

Another problem is the molar mass of nitroethane compared to say bromoethane. This will be very tuff (and long) to make 100 mL nitroethane.

Yet another problem is the high vapour pressure of nitroethane, it's volatile.

If you just react bromoethane with sodium nitrite, then the yields are less then 50% (the other compound that get formed is (oxonitroso)ethane AKA ethyl nitrite).


IVNT is a organization that try to stop the police razzia in chemophobic Germany.

zed - 10-11-2014 at 19:05

If you are in the U.S., that Nitroethane might as well be on Mars. You might occasionally be able to acquire Nitroethane legally within the U.S.. Check your locally newspapers for reports of flying pig migrations.

To attempt to import it without the appropriate permits, could be construed as a serious crime. Erase such thoughts from your mind.

careysub - 11-11-2014 at 08:06

Quote: Originally posted by chem50  
...
Exactly mate :) and from what ive heard nitroethane isn't even illegal in the USA! watched yes but not technically illegal. Again this is just what ive heard as im not in the US.
...

[Edited on 10-11-2014 by chem50]


As I understand it the status of chemical legality in the US (with respect to the DEA, not DHS) is:
Only scheduled substances are actually illegal to possess without a DEA license (or a valid script from a licensee).

The List 1 and 2 chemicals (not scheduled) are not illegal to possess, but have a monitoring apparatus set up and transactions involving these chemicals may be regulated depending on their nature.

Manufacturing, distributing, importing (or exporting) List 1 chemicals requires getting permission (a license) from the DEA. Nitroethane is a List 1 chemical so ordering it from an overseas source makes you an importer subject to DEA licensing - and is thus illegal.

Manufacturing, distributing, or importing List 2 chemicals does not require a DEA license, but the transactions may still be regulated transactions (depending on quantity), and the same record keeping and reporting is required.

If someone is licensed by the DEA (and thus the DEA is satisfied that they are keeping the required records of transactions) then they can sell List 1 and 2 chemicals, apparently to anybody.

Here is a DEA manual on this:

http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/pubs/manuals/chem/chem_man...

I have skimmed through it, but have not tried to parse every clause that may be relevant (a considerable task). And even if I did, it may not make things completely clear. There is a lot of complaint about the vagueness of DEA regulations.

I am still unclear about the exact significance of the threshold reporting amounts for List 1 and 2 chemicals. For many chemicals the quantities are very large (from the perspective of the amateur chemist). For example for nitroethane it is 2.5 kg.

But here is a very significant piece of information to take into account:

Iodine is a List 1 chemical with a no minimum reporting amount (i.e. any quantity is subject to reporting). Yet United Nuclear sells iodine to the general public, though the amount is limited to one ounce per "given person or address" per calendar year.

In general though if it is List 1, in the U.S. you can't get it. (And if you make it yourself you would need a license - something people making their own iodine or phosphorus, or nitroethane, should be aware of.)

The DEA makes sellers responsible for the actions of their customers - there is wide latitude for them to assert that a seller 'should have known' they were selling to an illegal drug operation, prosecutions are not restricted to technical violations of licensing requirements, which forces sellers to be extremely conservative for their own safety.

chem50 - 11-11-2014 at 15:49

Very interesting thanks for the info well its a real good job that im not in the US lol.

Just to let everyone know i was a little vague on my location when i first made this thread said i was located in europe but to be more specific im in the UK.

Synthesis of nitroethane seems not to appealing as im still fairly new to chemistry think i could do the sodium ethyl sulfate method but it seems even harder to obtain sodium ethyl sulfate!

Think ive found a legitimate supplier on ebay who ships from Poland about £20 more than that tip blender stuff not bad at all.

Im still a little confused on how to check if nitroethane is legit and pure though is a boiling point test really enough to test the purity? with nitroethane that would be heating it up to about 114c? obviously observing if it boils before reaching the set boiling point.

[Edited on 11-11-2014 by chem50]

NOV:5 - 11-11-2014 at 22:52

I keep seeing posts generally like those above, yet in my experience one can get pretty much whatever they want on ebay. I poked around there before I joined here and never had a problem finding whatever I was looking for. All of it exactly as described, list I, list II, list whatever...what i have found is that items are easier to find if one knows the varied forms and names...

Edited to add
For example, rp. I was surprised to see it listed, under a common synonym.

I don't need huge quantities of anything, industrial channels are not available to me as an individual, ebay is my first stop. I've never been sold a bogus bottle or box.

[Edited on 12-11-2014 by NOV:5]

Etaoin Shrdlu - 12-11-2014 at 17:09

Quote: Originally posted by careysub  
In general though if it is List 1, in the U.S. you can't get it.

Haha. I can get at least 5 of them readily in fair quantities (and have 4 of those on hand). The rest I haven't tried. It's not that bad.

careysub - 13-11-2014 at 05:47

Quote: Originally posted by Etaoin Shrdlu  
Quote: Originally posted by careysub  
In general though if it is List 1, in the U.S. you can't get it.

Haha. I can get at least 5 of them readily in fair quantities (and have 4 of those on hand). The rest I haven't tried. It's not that bad.


I should remember the adage "Generalizations are always bad." (Yes, that's a joke.)

The point I was trying to make in a terse summary was that although List 1 chemicals can legally be sold to the public under DEA regs, offerings of them by chemical dealers are quite scarce. Try buying phosphorus for example.

I mentioned one that you can get myself (iodine), but United Nuclear is the only company selling elemental iodine (as opposed to Lugol's solution) that I see.

I know how to get several of them also, mostly in an off-labelled manner. "Almond essence" that happens to be benzaldehyde, diethylamine salts know as "DEET" and so forth. Still I don't see U.S. chemical dealers offering them for sale.


[Edited on 13-11-2014 by careysub]

chem50 - 15-11-2014 at 14:21

So i picked up some nitroethane from a friend he said he has had it for a while picked it up in a bulk buy of chemicals that he won on auction through ebay apparently and he just never had a use for it.

I would of course like to just verify that i do infact have nitroethane as technically it could be anything - any ideas for quick tests i can do to verify its nitroethane? going to do a boil point test when i have the time. Chemistry is just my hobby and ive been mad busy with work so not had the time to do it yet.

Thanks :)

Etaoin Shrdlu - 15-11-2014 at 14:58

Quote: Originally posted by careysub  
The point I was trying to make in a terse summary was that although List 1 chemicals can legally be sold to the public under DEA regs, offerings of them by chemical dealers are quite scarce. Try buying phosphorus for example.

That would be a tricky one.

zed - 15-11-2014 at 16:25

Ummm. Certain listed items are restricted by the DEA. Some of THOSE items, plus additional items, are restricted by other agencies. ATF for one.

G-men can be very fussy about the sale of chemicals that could be used to manufacture bombs and chemical weapons.

Phosphorus is an ideal candidate for restricted access. Not easy to make it from scratch.
Lots of potentially dangerous uses. Not commonly used in commerce, but absolutely required for certain nefarious operations.





S.C. Wack - 15-11-2014 at 17:50

P actually is forbidden to have in some states. Try ordering safrole, methylamine, phenylacetic acid, and ergotamine.

When you order nitroethane or whatever from ebay and the US authorities decide to investigate why because they have decided that you are involved in drug activities, possession of sodium hydroxide becomes a crime, because you're using it to make meth, whether you actually are or not.

There should be many tests for nitroethane. There's always reduction to ethylamine HCl, or yellow crystals with benzaldehyde and base that give phenylacetone with Fe/HCl.

Etaoin Shrdlu - 15-11-2014 at 18:53

Quote: Originally posted by S.C. Wack  
Try ordering safrole, methylamine, phenylacetic acid, and ergotamine.

One of these I bought last year through a legitimate US chemical supplier, privately, no hassle. Didn't even know it was watched until I started paying more attention to clandestine drug manufacture.

Oh no I'm on a list.

I'd bury my sodium hydroxide in my yard but the ground's already frozen.

careysub - 17-11-2014 at 15:04

Quote: Originally posted by Etaoin Shrdlu  
Quote: Originally posted by S.C. Wack  
Try ordering safrole, methylamine, phenylacetic acid, and ergotamine.

One of these I bought last year through a legitimate US chemical supplier, privately, no hassle.


I'm betting it was methyamine.
Quote:
Didn't even know it was watched until I started paying more attention to clandestine drug manufacture.


Ditto when I bought lithium for my element collection.
Quote:

Oh no I'm on a list.

I'd bury my sodium hydroxide in my yard but the ground's already frozen.


Here's the thing.

To a substantial degree it does not matter that you are not doing anything illegal.

If you get raided at all your life is likely turned upside down, and not doing anything illegal does not mean that a jury will not convict you as a clever drug cook. And all of your assets can be seized without you even being charged with a crime - in fact the majority of asset seizures occur without any judicial action of any kind (not even civil):
http://www.justice.gov/oig/reports/2012/a1240.pdf

You don't want any attention from police at all - that is the best policy (along these lines, look up the "Never Talk to a Police Officer" video on YouTube).

On the other hand, I do not know of any cases of people being raided just because they made small purchases (a fraction of the thresholds for regulated transactions - see below) of watched substances.

Does anyone else?

Most of us are never going to purchase a threshold amount of any of these things in a given year (though if you purchase nine 4 oz bottles of DEET 100 you will exceed the limit).

Thresholds are in Appendix D:
http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/pubs/manuals/chem/chem_man...

For some fairly general/widely used reagents they are:
List 1:
Benzaldehyde 4 kilograms
Benzyl cyanide 1 kilogram
Ethylamine and its salts: 1 kilogram
Methylamine and its salts: 1 kilogram
Nitroethane: 2.5 kilograms
Piperidine and its salts: 500 grams
Piperonal (heliotropin): 4 kilograms

List 2:
Acetic anhydride: 250 gallons
Acetone: 50 gallons
Benzyl chloride: 1 kg
Ethyl ether: 50 gallons
Potassium permanganate: 55 kg
Methyl ethyl ketone: 50 gallons
Toluene: 50 gallons
Sodium permanganate: 55 kg

Zero threshold:
Anhydrous hydrogen chloride
Iodine
Phosphorus
Hypophosphorus compounds

aga - 17-11-2014 at 15:08

Iodine = Zero Threshold ?

So my 2g element specimen makes me jail worthy ?

Etaoin Shrdlu - 17-11-2014 at 15:45

Quote: Originally posted by careysub  
Here's the thing.

To a substantial degree it does not matter that you are not doing anything illegal.

If you get raided at all your life is likely turned upside down, and not doing anything illegal does not mean that a jury will not convict you as a clever drug cook.

1. Since I have zero samples of scheduled drugs on the premises, they would come out of a raid with zero samples of scheduled drugs. But hey, maybe they'd go to court anyway because there are just no real cooks in the area (ha) and they're goddamn desperate, where
2. My lab notebook and extensive inventory of innocuous chemicals would be fair evidence I was doing something quite different from making drugs, and
3. The only "intent to manufacture" law in Wisconsin relating to precursors rather than scheduled drugs requires significant amounts of ephedrine or pseudoephedrine on hand,* both of which I avoid even taking as a matter of course, furthermore
4. I choose not to live my life in fear someone will kick down my door for owning sodium hydroxide.

*I am neither a lawyer nor infallible, etcetera and so forth.
Quote: Originally posted by careysub  
And all of your assets can be seized without you even being charged with a crime - in fact the majority of asset seizures occur without any judicial action of any kind (not even civil):
http://www.justice.gov/oig/reports/2012/a1240.pdf

"Under criminal forfeiture proceedings, the forfeiture is part of the trial process that targets property named in the indictment. Proceedings to determine whether the property will be forfeited take place after, and only if, the defendant is convicted."

So, seized, yes. Of course they can take things they personally think are evidence or will be used to commit a crime. But in order to have it actually forfeited in a drug manufacturing case they need to convict you.
Quote: Originally posted by careysub  
You don't want any attention from police at all - that is the best policy (along these lines, look up the "Never Talk to a Police Officer" video on YouTube).

Of course I don't want attention from police. I just don't think ordering small amounts of List I chemicals is something to worry about, especially since I'm clean. Now the people making a big fuss over it, writing up lists of which reagents are the most suspicious and how to fake professional credentials and all that, well, they probably should worry because they're actually engaged in drug manufacture.

I'm not making explosives. I'm not making drugs. I'm not in an apartment. I can afford mild suspicion.
Quote: Originally posted by careysub  
On the other hand, I do not know of any cases of people being raided just because they made small purchases (a fraction of the thresholds for regulated transactions - see below) of watched substances.

Does anyone else?

I don't believe it's typical.
Quote: Originally posted by aga  
Iodine = Zero Threshold ?

So my 2g element specimen makes me jail worthy ?

Not at all. In the US, it just means that whoever sold it to you needed to keep a record.

[Edited on 11-17-2014 by Etaoin Shrdlu]

careysub - 17-11-2014 at 16:50

Quote: Originally posted by Etaoin Shrdlu  

...
The only "intent to manufacture" law in Wisconsin relating to precursors rather than scheduled drugs requires significant amounts of ephedrine or pseudoephedrine on hand,* both of which I avoid even taking as a matter of course


Bully for you.

There are a lot of people actually need pseudoephedrine for chronic conditions, and have it on hand. Should purging your medical cabinet be an essential act so as "not to live in fear"?

Federal law is also relevant here (especially if the DEA is in any way involved).

There are fair number of people in this country now that - under state law - are legal users of medical cannabis. These people can, and have been, successfully prosecuted in Federal court (there have been a couple of hundred such cases brought under the Obama Administration).

Has anything ever been downloaded to your computer that might be alleged to be "child pornography", perhaps by malware? Are you sure?

If you ever get raided all kinds of things can go south if the agency wants to make good on its investment in the original operation.

I think you have rather too much faith in the system operating on your behalf.
Quote:
So, seized, yes. Of course they can take things they personally think are evidence or will be used to commit a crime. But in order to have it actually forfeited in a drug manufacturing case they need to convict you.


Under civil forfeiture they don't have to prove anything - you have to take timely action and prove you are innocent to get your stuff back. This can be significantly difficult when all your assets have already been taken.
Quote:
Now the people making a big fuss over it, writing up lists of which reagents are the most suspicious and how to fake professional credentials and all that, well, they probably should worry because they're actually engaged in drug manufacture.


Whoa there!

Especially that part about "writing up lists of which reagents are the most suspicious" as I did above.

Spoken like a DEA agent.
Quote:
Quote: Originally posted by careysub  
On the other hand, I do not know of any cases of people being raided just because they made small purchases (a fraction of the thresholds for regulated transactions - see below) of watched substances.

Does anyone else?


I don't believe it's typical.


I don't think it is typical either. The question is, does it occur at all?

Etaoin Shrdlu - 17-11-2014 at 17:44

Quote: Originally posted by careysub  
Bully for you.

There are a lot of people actually need pseudoephedrine for chronic conditions, and have it on hand. Should purging your medical cabinet be an essential act so as "not to live in fear"?

No, it shouldn't. The vast majority of drug laws are pointless and stupid and only went into effect because the international community decided it would be fantastic to engage in a pointless and stupid treaty. I'm just telling you why I'm not afraid when you're telling me I should be. There is one, still-contestable, thing they could get me on, and I'm not even touching it.
Quote: Originally posted by careysub  
Federal law is also relevant here (especially if the DEA is in any way involved).

Which they have no reason to be. And federal "intent to manufacture" laws, as far as I can tell, are about as vague as "you're not allowed to have listed chemicals if you intend to make scheduled drugs with them." Figured that out already from the "don't make scheduled drugs" bit. I'd hazard a guess you're not supposed to intend to make scheduled drugs with water, even.

There is zero evidence I intend to make scheduled drugs, and a hell of a lot of evidence I don't (since I'm using the reagents to make things which are not scheduled drugs).
Quote: Originally posted by careysub  
There are fair number of people in this country now that - under state law - are legal users of medical cannabis. These people can, and have been, successfully prosecuted in Federal court (there have been a couple of hundred such cases brought under the Obama Administration).

Wow, stuff prohibited by federal law remains prohibited until the law is repealed? Good thing I'm still not in possession of scheduled drugs. Dodged a real bullet there.
Quote: Originally posted by careysub  
Has anything ever been downloaded to your computer that might be alleged to be "child pornography", perhaps by malware? Are you sure?

Fairly sure, yes. And I'm not terribly worried someone will take the time to argue that I deliberately acquired malware. After all, there's no conspiracy against me here. (Unless you know something I don't?)
Quote: Originally posted by careysub  
If you ever get raided all kinds of things can go south if the agency wants to make good on its investment in the original operation.

Sure. Why would they when I have a strong case on my behalf and they could go after the actual cooks downtown? Most of them do want to catch actual criminals, you know.
Quote: Originally posted by careysub  
I think you have rather too much faith in the system operating on your behalf.

No, I have no faith in the system at all. I have a lot of faith that I've done nothing to run afoul of it.
Quote: Originally posted by careysub  
Under civil forfeiture they don't have to prove anything - you have to take timely action and prove you are innocent to get your stuff back. This can be significantly difficult when all your assets have already been taken.

A drug case would not fall under civil forfeiture.
Quote: Originally posted by careysub  
Especially that part about "writing up lists of which reagents are the most suspicious" as I did above.

Spoken like a DEA agent.

Laughing my ass off. It should have been damn clear that I wasn't referring to anything like what you wrote. I'm referring, in fact, to writeups such as this (which actually fit the criteria I stated): https://www.erowid.org/archive/rhodium/chemistry/buychem.igo...

"Be able to spout off your SSN, driver's license number, street address, business name/phone/address, birth date, etc., immediately upon being asked. And don't just make them up on the spot. [...] If you're picking up in person, print up some business cards and take them along with your PO and fake ID."

Yeah, that guy should have just as little to worry about as I do. He wasn't cooking drugs at all. I'm just an overly paranoid DEA agent with too much vegetable oil and sodium hydroxide.

zed - 23-11-2014 at 16:18

Ummmm. This has become a long-winded political debate. Which is OK, but it isn't Chemistry.
Seems like there is another section for stuff like this.

Chemosynthesis - 23-11-2014 at 18:17

Quote: Originally posted by Etaoin Shrdlu  

Wow, stuff prohibited by federal law remains prohibited until the law is repealed?

Federal law supersedes state law, with plenty of legal precedent deriving from interpretation of the Supremacy Clause. Not to be degrading, but it's pretty basic civics.
Quote:

A drug case would not fall under civil forfeiture.

It certainly well may, and has since the 1980's. I could name names in history, but please look into it yourself. You will find that there is a long history of both civil and criminal forfeiture laws applying to drug cases, or suspected drug cases, and all that stemmed from it (money laundering, etc.). Carey is 100% correct.

I second the motion for politics to be discussed in Legal and Societal Matters or Whimsy, though.

Etaoin Shrdlu - 23-11-2014 at 20:02

Quote: Originally posted by Chemosynthesis  
Quote: Originally posted by Etaoin Shrdlu  

Wow, stuff prohibited by federal law remains prohibited until the law is repealed?

Federal law supersedes state law, with plenty of legal precedent deriving from interpretation of the Supremacy Clause. Not to be degrading, but it's pretty basic civics.

That was pretty basic sarcasm. I'm not actually surprised that laws generally remain valid until they're repealed. ;)
Quote: Originally posted by Chemosynthesis  
Quote:

A drug case would not fall under civil forfeiture.

It certainly well may, and has since the 1980's. I could name names in history, but please look into it yourself. You will find that there is a long history of both civil and criminal forfeiture laws applying to drug cases, or suspected drug cases, and all that stemmed from it (money laundering, etc.). Carey is 100% correct.

With respect, are you telling me I could be accused of illegally manufacturing drugs but not of criminal activity? If so I am fascinated and would like to know more as I have never run across this. I know property can be taken under civil forfeiture if they can show it was used for something criminal and the owner isn't being charged (and can't or won't prove their own innocence of what was going on), or if the owner just doesn't contest, but I would be very clear that I was the only one making use of my glassware, reagents, etcetera, and it seems to me that if they insisted that said use was illegal drug manufacture that it would all fall directly into a criminal case.

Agree this should probably be in Whimsy, but of course this is at the discretion of the mods and I'd rather keep things to this thread until it's split instead of randomly posting elsewhere.

Chemosynthesis - 24-11-2014 at 04:41

Quote: Originally posted by Etaoin Shrdlu  
With respect, are you telling me I could be accused of illegally manufacturing drugs but not of criminal activity? If so I am fascinated and would like to know more as I have never run across this. I know property can be taken under civil forfeiture if they can show it was used for something criminal and the owner isn't being charged (and can't or won't prove their own innocence of what was going on), or if the owner just doesn't contest, but I would be very clear that I was the only one making use of my glassware, reagents, etcetera, and it seems to me that if they insisted that said use was illegal drug manufacture that it would all fall directly into a criminal case.
Charges levied against you are irrelevant; you can be indicted, acquitted, convicted, or never charged and still face civil forfeiture because under the civil forfeiture, your property is challenged rather than you (legally.) You could even be in jail without bond while your window to exonerate your property closes. Wisconsin has a better preponderance of evidence than most (reasonable doubt), but that doesn't mean federal law won't apply (state and federal charges don't preclude one another via double jeopardy... so you could face both.) It isn't merely the prosecution demonstrating illicit use/acquisition... it's you having to substantiate the negative. The property being on trial, as a civil case with lower preponderances of evidence, is a technicality that allows the presumption of innocence not to apply. Property has no rights, and you theoretically suffer no criminal penalties of confiscation. This also allows civil forfeiture to avoid any double jeopardy with criminal prosecution, so you can face civil and criminal forfeiture if one were evaded.

However... if your assets were taken and then you were charged with any crime whatsoever, you would have a hard time attaining legal counsel of your choice (only provided for criminal charges, with zero inherent interest in your civil case), and then if you were held without bail (could even theoretically be done as a favor to you since you'd likely be destitute and homeless in the interim period), you would have a hard time substantiating your assets were obtained through legal means (assuming you saved receipts, have witnesses of sale, etc.) Or you could be charged, a case dismissed, and then face civil forfeiture anyway out of spite or retribution.

[Edited on 24-11-2014 by Chemosynthesis]

MrBlank1 - 24-11-2014 at 11:45

above : +1

Generally speaking, is universally applicable. I have it on fairly good authority this is true :P

Protip : Keep a duplicate copy of your sales records off-site. Comes in handy if the originals become evidence ( and yes, they check the paper receipts for prints too )

[Edited on 24-11-2014 by MrBlank1]

[Edited on 24-11-2014 by MrBlank1]

careysub - 24-11-2014 at 12:59

To return the matter to the problems of home chemistry:

I posted on this thread trying to develop information for assessing the actual hazards of bringing law enforcement attention from purchases of modest amounts of chemicals.

The canard "if you are doing nothing wrong, you have nothing to worry about" has never been true, nor is it ever likely to be.

Any attention at all from law enforcement is hazardous to one's well being, since even groundless, meritless cases can be extremely expensive - in many ways.

The reporting quantities for listed chemicals (generally kilograms [e.g. nitroethane] or even hundreds of kilograms [e.g acetic anhydride], depending) in DEA regulations is clearly focused on actual drug manufacturers who must turn out a lot of product to make it an actual business or to supply the market in a significant way.

A home lab, using these reagents for experiments, consumes much smaller amounts - perhaps 1/10 to as little as 1/1000 the reporting quantity. Is there any evidence that there is actual jeopardy in doing this?

I can avoid buying anything on List 1 easily enough. But List 2, and special surveillance list include common reagents that are difficult to replace or prepare on one's own.

NB:
Making explicit risk assessments of things is something I do routinely - as everything one does in life has risks, which must be balanced against the expected benefits.

One can argue, if you are concerned about legal jeopardy, then you shouldn't do it at all. Certainly that is the safest course to take, but the argument is fundamentally invalid. Anything you do in life entails risks of different kinds.

Going out to see a movie entails a calculable chance of death from car accident for a frivolous activity, but I doubt anyone would counsel that going to see movies should be avoided due to the hazard to life. If the movie requires a 10 mile round-trip, the chance of death is something like one in ten million.

A lot of people engage in hobbies that are far riskier than that - skydiving and hang gliding both come in at around 1 per 100,000 events (BASE jumping is truly extreme at 1 in 2500). A lot of sports incur fatality rates around 1 in 100,000 or higher per year of participation.

However to assess risks you need to develop data. So far I haven't heard of anyone being raided in the U.S. on account of small chemical purchases, which suggests the risk is very low - or simply that law enforcement does not publicize this fact. (A lot of raids are due to "anonymous tips" - which could easily be used as cover.)

Etaoin Shrdlu - 24-11-2014 at 13:29

Quote: Originally posted by Chemosynthesis  
Charges levied against you are irrelevant; you can be indicted, acquitted, convicted, or never charged and still face civil forfeiture because under the civil forfeiture, your property is challenged rather than you (legally.)

This is true. However, people tend to take the option of either simply allowing the forfeiture to go through, or of playing the innocent owner ("if my property was used for illegal activity, I was not aware"). This is further complicated by the fact that a lot of these seizure cases have genuinely illegal things going on related to them, including civil matters like hazards caused by improper storage where the owner of the property really was innocent of manufacturing drugs.

I would not take either of these options. I would make it explicitly clear that I keep control over my chemicals and glassware, thus that anything going on with my property was my doing, and if they chose to declare my property forfeit for something criminal I would subsequently argue that they had determined my guilt without a proper trial. Whether or not they chose to try to have me locked up would have no bearing on this. You're entitled to a trial whether or not sentence is followed through with, unless you waive that right yourself.

Now, sure, they could attempt to keep the case of me and my property separate, but I'm going to say a civil verdict of "well, fairies must have been illegally manufacturing drugs while you were at work" would be pretty easy for me to challenge later.

I don't think there's a legal precedent for staying in civil court when someone is actively insisting that the hypothetical criminal activity in question is their own hypothetical criminal activity, but I will try to check later. (Once you get a suspect, aren't you supposed to actually charge them instead of saying they did something illegal but pretending you're talking about someone else? Why would they even do this?)
Quote: Originally posted by Chemosynthesis  
You could even be in jail without bond while your window to exonerate your property closes.

If I'm in jail without bond, this is a criminal case, not a civil one. Also, they are required to give the owner the chance to respond in court.
Quote: Originally posted by Chemosynthesis  
Wisconsin has a better preponderance of evidence than most (reasonable doubt), but that doesn't mean federal law won't apply (state and federal charges don't preclude one another via double jeopardy... so you could face both.)

Yes, because federal governments and state governments have "dual sovereignty," so you can be prosecuted under both state and federal law for the same thing. There was a case in 2013 called Roach vs. Missouri which would have brought the issue up for reexamination, but the Supreme Court declined. Frankly, I can see arguments for both sides here. One one hand, you don't want someone getting doubly punished for the same offense, but on the other hand, you don't want the federal court to be unable to touch someone after they've been tried in state court, otherwise states could effectively nullify federal regulations by specifying minimal or nonexistent penalties for the same crimes.

I'm already not worried about being prosecuted, I'm even less worried about being doubly prosecuted after one exoneration. Hey, it could happen, but I could also get mugged walking out of the local supermarket, a scenario which is probably more likely and which leaves me similarly unconcerned. The odds are too slim to fret over.
Quote: Originally posted by Chemosynthesis  
This also allows civil forfeiture to avoid any double jeopardy with criminal prosecution, so you can face civil and criminal forfeiture if one were evaded.

I am fairly certain that if you're cleared of criminal activity in a case, they can't then go after your property for the same case (in the same jurisdiction, anyway). At the very least, the evidence that showed you were innocent of criminal activity is still applicable to your property the second time around. How would they argue the drugs were made once I had already been legally cleared? I don't think I'd want to be the person who tried to overturn a jury trial in civil court.
Quote: Originally posted by Chemosynthesis  
However... if your assets were taken and then you were charged with any crime whatsoever, you would have a hard time attaining legal counsel of your choice (only provided for criminal charges, with zero inherent interest in your civil case)

I'm quite happy with my options in legal counsel as it stands now, and I would despite that as quickly as possible turn any civil case into a criminal one.
Quote: Originally posted by Chemosynthesis  
you would have a hard time substantiating your assets were obtained through legal means (assuming you saved receipts, have witnesses of sale, etc.)

I do save receipts. Uninvolved witnesses of sale? No. People who can substantiate that I bought things from them and a very clear paper trail for anything that would be under question? Yes. Really, though, if it comes down to someone arguing I might have obtained my sodium hydroxide illegally, they have no case. (As for my money, it all comes from sources which are patently obviously legal.)
Quote: Originally posted by Chemosynthesis  
Or you could be charged, a case dismissed, and then face civil forfeiture anyway out of spite or retribution.

Sure. If I was high profile or there was a massive conspiracy against me. But I'm not and there isn't.
Quote: Originally posted by careysub  
One can argue, if you are concerned about legal jeopardy, then you shouldn't do it at all. Certainly that is the safest course to take, but the argument is fundamentally invalid. Anything you do in life entails risks of different kinds.

Going out to see a movie entails a calculable chance of death from car accident for a frivolous activity, but I doubt anyone would counsel that going to see movies should be avoided due to the hazard to life. If the movie requires a 10 mile round-trip, the chance of death is something like one in ten million.

This is my stance exactly. Not "If I'm doing nothing wrong, I have nothing to worry about," but "I'm not doing anything wrong, and I have plenty of things I could worry about. Car crashes! Lightning! Random muggings! The DEA kicking down my door! Most of them aren't worth dwelling on." I spend far more time making sure my home lab is safe and clean than I do taking precautions just in case someone's slowly ticking down their watch list and it's only a matter of time until they get to me. Not that imagining how things might hypothetically go wrong isn't fun.

I'm sorry, I know of no cases personally where (legitimate) home chemists got into serious legal trouble just for ordering small quantities of watched chemicals. It's usually the distributors who get nailed, or the people setting off bombs/storing outlandish quantities of fairly hazardous chemicals (though I think the response is rarely reasonable in the latter case).

Chemosynthesis - 24-11-2014 at 15:50

Post not entirely relevant to chemistry, so possibly ignore.

Careysub: Very well stated in your last post. I would be surprised if law enforcement actually collates data with this false positive raid statistic, as it serves no funding benefit (kindof similar to how DHS can cite statistics that aren't always according to UCR standards) and I have actually discussed this with sworn investigators at local and federal levels on DEA task forces. They (one with a graduate background in chemistry) have thusfar appeared perplexed at even receiving the question.

To give some context, though, one had said he "had no interest in hobbyists" despite this not addressing the legitimate concern of mistakenly investigating one, potentially wasting both police and citizens' resources.

Etaoin Shrdlu: I wasn't addressing your specific situation, but rather the general risk. I'm aware of Roach, but as you said... it's not relevant. Ursery v. United States is what I recommend be looked at instead for stare decesis. Despite your contention that evidence used in a criminal trial is available for subsequent civil forfeiture cases, this isn't taking into account the lower burden of proof or jury's ability to use taking the Fifth against you in federal (and most states) civil asset forfeitures, or the sheer inconvenience of potentially having assets seized.

And even if one were found not guilty of drug manufacture, civil court could require substantiation of not distilling alcohol without paying proper ATF taxes, or getting DEA paperwork for scheduled precursors (something many of this forum appear to do) or similar. I have heard of ridiculous things prosecutors have done, such as using Church of Scientology v. IRS, 484 U.S. 9 (1987) to attempt to prevent NFA tax forms from being released to defense attorneys in at least one instance (this ATF case not relevant to the chemistry, and I never kept up with how that turned out, but even an attempt at something this blatant demonstrates, at best... needless and expensive inconvenience).

One reason many (no stats) of the forfeiture cases are not fought is that legal expenses often outweigh the value of seized assets. The opportunity cost of continuing on with life, if possible, and not hiring a lawyer can obviously outweigh the expenses of getting a car, lab equipment, petty cash, reagents, etc. back. This can skew statistics, and serves to provide police agencies with low risk income.

"If I'm in jail without bond, this is a criminal case, not a civil one. Also, they are required to give the owner the chance to respond in court." I'm aware... however, my statement is meant to convey IF you are facing both a criminal indictment AND have had property confiscated due to civil asset forfeiture. This was the case at the very inception of civil forfeiture's use preceding drug cases; during Operation Jackpot's court cases, prosecutor McMaster used federal civil asset forfeiture laws to go after marijuana smugglers prior to initiating a criminal proceeding. This diminished defendents' ability to flee, but also their ability to live everyday life, hire attorneys, etc. (McMaster is now an elected lieutenant governor after rising to the prominence of attorney general due partially to this very technique).

I am glad you are happy with your available counsel. I am with mine as well, but would prefer never to have to use it in the future. Not everyone has a lawyer on retainer, in a family, etc., and some occupations require detailed notification of every law enforcement encounter one has. Even acquittals can pose problems in security clearance screening or exclusive private sector background checks, or can disclose personal finances to the public if the proceedings weren't sealed by a judge.

Just because inconvenience is unlikely to happen to some of us, doesn't mean that the question of risk isn't worth posing. The City of Philadelphia just recently had a class action suit against them (Sourvolis et al.) specifically because the city is seen to use civil forfeiture to take property that is unlikely to be defended in order to pad their budgets at no real risk to themselves. As far as conspiracies against someone, all one needs to do is consider how Mike Nifong or William Ryan (against Nicholas Yarris, even attempting to retry him 90 days after exoneration) acted in the light of facts.

zed - 24-11-2014 at 19:15

"I am fairly certain that if you're cleared of criminal activity in a case, they can't then go after your property for the same case (in the same jurisdiction, anyway). At the very least, the evidence that showed you were innocent of criminal activity is still applicable to your property the second time around. How would they argue the drugs were made once I had already been legally cleared? I don't think I'd want to be the person who tried to overturn a jury trial in civil court."

Depends on individual State, or Federal Law.

You will remember that OJ Simpson was acquited in criminal court, for the murder of his wife......and then, convicted in civil court....for her wrongful death. The judgement was in the millions. The standard of evidence in criminal cases and civil cases, is different.

In criminal cases, the standard is " proven beyond a reasonable doubt". In California civil cases, the standard is " proven by the preponderance of the evidence".

Mush - 28-1-2015 at 14:00

Desperately need nitroethane?
Here you go!


Ethylformiat, Nitroethan
http://www.acrifix.com/sites/dc/Downloadcenter/Evonik/Produc...

Ethylformiat 109-94-4 F, Xn 11-20/22-36/37 15,0-40,0
Nitroethan 79-24-3 Xn 10-20/22 15,0-40,0%
2-Phenoxyethanol 122-99-6 Xn 22-36 3,0-7,0 %
Ethylacetat 141-78-6 F,Xi 11-36-66-67 3.0-7,0%
Butan-1-ol 71-36-3 Xn 10-22-37/38-41-67 1,0-5.0%
http://www.maagtechnic.ch/fileadmin/user_upload/documents/Da...

Nitroethane on eBay

Jules - 29-12-2016 at 16:50

The nitroethane sold as tip blender on eBay from the German site is a complete con it's actually acetone. I complained and got a refund but obviously this has been going on for sometime and nothing has been done about it despite the fact that in my opinion this is fraud and a criminal offense. How many people have been sold this cheap product at a hugely inflated price is probably impossible to discover accurately but I'm sure other people have complained too. I'm considering making an official complaint to the German authorities, has anyone here tried doing this? We have to put a stop to con merchants such as this and it's disturbing to find that eBay haven't removed this crooked operator from their site.

Corrosive Joeseph - 29-12-2016 at 17:02

Quote: Originally posted by Jules  
The nitroethane sold as tip blender on eBay from the German site is a complete con it's actually acetone. I complained and got a refund but obviously this has been going on for sometime and nothing has been done about it despite the fact that in my opinion this is fraud and a criminal offense. How many people have been sold this cheap product at a hugely inflated price is probably impossible to discover accurately but I'm sure other people have complained too. I'm considering making an official complaint to the German authorities, has anyone here tried doing this? We have to put a stop to con merchants such as this and it's disturbing to find that eBay haven't removed this crooked operator from their site.


You want to complain to the 'authorities' that you were ripped off trying to buy a major precursor for speed..................?

Well, good luck with that..................

/CJ

Edit - Please don't take my post the wrong way in these troubled, chemophobic times. Nitroethane is not illegal in Europe but I'm sure its acquisition raises a few eyebrows. There is probably no need to complain to the German authorities because (thanks to eBay selling out their users) I'm sure they already know you have purchased it, or at least tried to. It isn't easy being a home chemist these days and I am all against any kind of restrictions and censorship.

Complaining will just bring attention to you and if you are okay with that, well then, you are okay with that. Just saying. Be safe.................

/CJ

[Edited on 30-12-2016 by Corrosive Joeseph]

Tsjerk - 29-12-2016 at 22:40

Pretty ballsy ordering that stuff in Germany nowadays, they are not only looking for drug cooks but also potential bomb manufacturers more than ever. I don't know what you have laying around but in the past German police did raids for ordering CuSO4. Remember that if they want they can frame you for having precursors for explosives with just nitroethane and NaOH.

German government gives 1000's of euro fines for illegally downloading a movie, and police likes to get away with shooting unarmed minors in the back.

[Edited on 30-12-2016 by Tsjerk]

Dan Vizine - 30-12-2016 at 07:45

Quote: Originally posted by careysub  
Quote: Originally posted by Etaoin Shrdlu  
Quote: Originally posted by S.C. Wack  
Try ordering safrole, methylamine, phenylacetic acid, and ergotamine.

One of these I bought last year through a legitimate US chemical supplier, privately, no hassle.


I'm betting it was methyamine.
Quote:
Didn't even know it was watched until I started paying more attention to clandestine drug manufacture.


I'm betting phenylacetic acid. Methylamine is VERY tightly controlled because it screams "methedrine". PAA just whispers it.

You know that this is quite suspect, right? You are a brand new member with almost no history. And you just happen to inquire about the hard chemical to get to make a certain beta nitro styrene. In this approach to amphetamine, there is only one really hard acquisition, EtNO2.

If someone asks you what you need this exact nitro alkyl for, what would you say? What are your planned uses that makes it necessary for it to be ethyl and not propyl, for example.

Amphetamine synthesis is a bad reason to go to prison. The sentence is usually quite harsh.

[Edited on 30-12-2016 by Dan Vizine]

glen - 4-12-2020 at 18:25

I’m sorry, I know this is years out of date but I worked with a guy that used to cook meth in GA. He had stopped cooking, had a “Cush” county job (as he put it) so they knew what he was making. Then he got into dealing Mexican meth. He told me he knew the local sheriff was after him for years and he was finally done in by a wired buy and marked money etc. He was quite clear that as soon as he was accused they took (stole) all his property even shit he had from years before he started any alleged behavior. It’s a criminal criminal justice system. Fuck them, never talk without a lawyer, never admit to anything without signed deals etc. They act like a meth lab is a biohazard situation despite all the chemicals being completely OTC and I know there’s a LOT MORE DANGEROUS SHIT IN MOST OLD PEOPLES HOUSES!!!! I had old women neighbors ask me to dust their garden with Lead Arsinate as pesticide ( which it had been sold as back in 1960). But never trust cops!!!!!