His anecdote is not sufficient to refute the claim that 9 times out of 10 you should cooperate with LE.
The user probably is a mushroom abuser, given the fact that they are a self-proclaimed marijuana abuser and have expressed interest in Psilocybin mushrooms.

These are two separate things, his anecdote probably being a lie makes his argument look worse but it is not necessary to show that it is insufficient. It would be an incorrect argument based solely on the first point.

I personally just find it humourous and incredulous that he supposedly spent 2 weeks in jail, because he totally wasn't using Psilocybin mushrooms. You know Shiitakes are huge and pretty hard to confuse with Psilocybin, not to mention the fact that you can test them pretty easily. (They are also in tons of grocery stores, so it's not exactly alien to everyday individuals).

[–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That is much more likely than it sounds. Law enforcement in the United States are fond of a $2 drug test that reacts with practically anything. Allegely, it waa supposed to serve as a field test (with follow-up tests at a lab) but these days is used as probable cause in a baggie.

This test has been known to land gazed donut enjoyers in jail as well as someone transporting the cremated remains of a recently deceased loved one. It would not surprise me if a (willfully) ignorant police officer eager to ruin someone's day woud use such a test on produce mushrooms to assert cause to arrest.

While I cannot say that is what happened here, I can say it's not merely plausible in the States, but expected, especially if someone shows signs they don't have a family lawyer.

You seem eager to give law enforcement the benefit of the doubt, which I assure you in the US, at from the precinct level though municipal department, county sheriff, state department and federal level they do not deserve.