And that same challenge of establishing intent would exist with this bill as well, wouldn't it? The only overt fact you're going to have, if you're seizing equipment for something that might be intended for use in a meth lab, is the intention. You have to find the intention and have evidence of it. The police are not going to seize anything unless they have evidence. You have to have part of the lab turning on the confreres and providing evidence, or you're going to have an intercepted communication. Wouldn't that be correct?
In other words, this new law isn't going to enhance your ability to get that evidence, is it?
