In the US, under what situations are you legally required to carry identification?
No, there is not. No state has such a provision.However, several states require you to be able to identify yourself to law enforcement as long as they have "reasonable suspicion" - it is an arrestable offence to not be able to do so in such circumstances. In some cases giving your full name without any Id is sufficient.There are several situations where you absolutely need to show legal id (buying alcohol or tobacco would be two examples).While driving, you need to have a valid drivers license on hand if a law enforcement officer stops you. Failing to or inability to show is an offence.In some states you need to show Id to vote.In all other cases you do not need to be carrying ID
How To Find Houses Eligible For Adverse Possession In Austin Texas?
It is unlikely he'll stay in the house for the full time period required by the law without being contested. By getting noticed and getting his story on the news, he will now almost certainly get an action taken against the bank (the property has reportedly been transferred to Bank of America after the original loan company went under). If you wanted to do adverse possession, you would probably want to do it as quietly as possible. In Austin, failure to pay county taxes will generally get a property foreclosed by Williamson or Travis county pretty rapidly (less than a year or two after the delinquency). In Austin, there are regular property auctions once a month where you can bid for property that is delinquent on its taxes, and the starting bid is generally the amount of back taxes. So you'll need to find the property and pay the taxes for it yourself before it goes to the normal tax foreclosure process. You can use the Travis and Williamson county tax websites to view the tax payment history for any property in the Austin area (and even pay for it). I would probably just drive around and look for houses with unmaintained landscaping but not a sale/foreclosure sign and check the status of it on the county's website. You can even use the county's website to retrieve all public records against an address and see if there is a foreclosure in process (usually it will show the loan paperwork and any liens). You will probably want to befriend a realtor and get them to also look up the address in the MLS directory to see if it is already in the process of being sold.
Where can someone get DMT, and is the drug legal?
DMT is the active ingredient in ayahuasca, a psychedelic drug that is used by shamans from Brazil. There is no proof it is addictive or that it is harmful when used under supervision of a trained practitioner. There have been a few recorded deaths, but they were because the users used it on their own.Oddly enough, our brains produce DMT, but we have blockers in our system. So we are all illegal just by existing!One can find more information about it doing a web search, and Graham Hancock is an avid user. He talks a lot about it on his youtube videos.It is not legal in the US (it is a Schedule I drug) or Great Britain. However, if you belong to a religious church that uses it, it is allowed. I would be careful, however, because the feds can always make a case that you are not doing it for religious purposes.As to where to get it, you can ask around at alternative health conferences or spiritual advisors. It’s really word of mouth. I understand that there are regular meetings in New York and northern California. There are also trips to Brazil that shamans will take you. Please note that it is important to find a person, a spirit guide, who is qualified, experienced and not in it for the money.The real question is WHY is it illegal? I have no idea. It’s much safer than alcohol, and there are no adverse health affects associated with it, and there is no evidence that it is addictive. There is no evidence any organ or the brain are harmed by it.EDIT: Famed best selling author Michael Pollan just wrote a new book entitled, “How to Change Your Mind,” a history of psychedelics — their origination, the extensive research conducted on them, the hysteria surrounding them, and where we are today. It’s an excellent book, and it explains the evidence that LSD and other psycedelics are not only non-addictive, they are generally safer than alcohol. He also explains his own experiences with LSD, magic mushroom, and the Toad. I highly recommend it for people who want a dispassionate look.
Should drug offenders be treated as criminals or addicts?
For me, it would be neither, they're both pretty negative labels. I'd prefer it if they were called victims of the war on drugs. Your question doesn't make clear what offences they have committed, but looking at most incarcerated prisoners, they're there for non-violent drug offences, mainly possession. They just got caught buying or selling something that someone decided long ago they shouldn't have.Treating them as criminals is what we've done for a hundred years. We take them out of their lives of poverty and lack of opportunity, and put them in a locked cell, to further erode their sense of humanity, optimism and connectedness to other human beings. When they get out, they have no home, no recourse to public funds, seriously damaged employment chances and a burning desire to medicate against this desolate wasteland by returning to their drug of choice. Prison fixes nothing. Prison makes matters worse.In 2002 Portugal decided to stop this nonsense and de facto decriminalised all drugs for personal use. Now, when people are caught in possession, they are assessed for their health needs, given education and information and offered routes to treatment. The results speak for themselves: more people in treatment, HIV infection rates absolutely slashed, and fewer uses of drugs across all drugs and all demographics. Oh, and of course, they're saving money hand over fist by not locking up all the drug users.Lastly, coercion simply does not work. Any users who've tried to quit because someone else wants you to can attest to that. Any range of choices works, because one size does not fit all. Court mandated treatment is largely a waste of money. Again, the Portuguese are getting this right. They are working with humans, with shades of grey, not black and white/ good and bad/rehab and jail. Humans are nuanced individuals, and at the sharp end, where treatment is required, choices still must be presented. Because when presented with choices, even sick people choose positively.I strongly recommend Johann Hari's book Chasing The Scream - The First and Last Days of the War on Drugs to anyone who isn't sure what the impact of the War on Drug (users) has been, and what alternatives to the status quo might look like.