Paul Holmes - open letter to John Key

**Drunken Monkey** · 24th August 2009, 09:20

Originally Posted by Usarka

A lot of todays P users are folk who took ecstacy and other drugs and have tuned out to the warnings either because they don't ignore them or that they've proven themselves able to handle dangerous drugs.

Got anything better than anecdotal evidence to back this claim up?

**Drunken Monkey** · 24th August 2009, 09:21

Originally Posted by Hitcher

Bull. Shit.

Legalising, as you suggest, makes drugs socially acceptable.

If crystal meth was as available and as acceptable as alcohol, those of us who remained sober would be heavily armed and living in fortified compounds.

Prohibition is just as ineffective.

**short-circuit** · 24th August 2009, 09:22

Originally Posted by Hitcher

Bull. Shit.

Legalising, as you suggest, makes drugs socially acceptable.

If crystal meth was as available and as acceptable as alcohol, those of us who remained sober would be heavily armed and living in fortified compounds.

Yeah sure just like the dole is such a gravy train that people are chucking their jobs left right and centre in the scramble to get on it.

The way forward is toward an enlightened approach as opposed to a fear based one. FULL decriminalisation (and control) of all drugs. Drug use should be dealt with in the Health and Education sectors, and NOT the Criminal Justice System

**Hitcher** · 24th August 2009, 09:30

Originally Posted by short-circuit

The way forward is toward an enlightened approach as opposed to a fear based one. FULL decriminalisation (and control) of all drugs. Drug use should be dealt with in the Health and Education sectors, and NOT the Criminal Justice System

Remember that this is a country that requires laws to stop people doing things, like texting whilst driving, that defy sense and reason one would presume, sufficiently for people to not want to do them anyway.

If full decriminalisation was such a cool idea, then some enlightened country somewhere would have tried it by now. I'm not talking about "recreational" drugs (which is another subject entirely) when advocating a hard line on enforcement and control. I'm talking about the evil highly addictive life-destroying shit and the sexy criminal underworld that peddles it.

**short-circuit** · 24th August 2009, 09:39

Originally Posted by Hitcher

Remember that this is a country that requires laws to stop people doing things, like texting whilst driving, that defy sense and reason one would presume, sufficiently for people to not want to do them anyway.

If full decriminalisation was such a cool idea, then some enlightened country somewhere would have tried it by now. I'm not talking about "recreational" drugs (which is another subject entirely) when advocating a hard line on enforcement and control. I'm talking about the evil highly addictive life-destroying shit and the sexy criminal underworld that peddles it.

Other countries have set up sterile injecting clinics and safe needle exchange etc. Do your homework.

Think about how sexy rocking up to one of those in your pyjamas for your morning fix would be.

**Mystic13** · 24th August 2009, 09:40

I agree that Paul's letter is misguided at best.

I've dealt with him (Paul) and he's a &^%$#. I've never met someone so full of themselves in my entire life.

I don't think Cold and Flu sufferers should be punished because Paul and co spoiled Millie.

____________________

What really concerns me is the two levels of law that exist in NZ for the wealthy and the rest of us. Millie should be in jail.

Take Veitch.

If anyone else broke someone else's back they'd do jail time. He got a $10,000 fine which he could pay easily.

Veitch goes missing from the family batch at Pauanui. They call the police and the police race out. Bugger me. If I rang the police they'd ask have they been missing for 24 hours? If I answered no then they won't even treat it as a missing person. Two cop cars rush out straight away and find him over the sand dune from the house. WTF can't rich families walk over a sand dune.

He wanders off again and police do an immediate search, track his phone and locate him. F&%K me! Are you kidding. Unbelievably special treatment.

I'd also met Veitch and he was a shit bag as well. And I'm sure he won't change.

What we really need is a closer look at the special treatment the rich and famous are getting. I'm sure they can get a pile of psychologists reports saying their kids can't handle it in jail. But isn't that what jails for. Sure they'll miss out on the trips, the nightclubs, the cars and the parties.

I have no sympathy for Millie.

________________

Taking on P is a different story. It seems that it's in the too hard basket. I think you have to take a look at the whole picture. Our judicial system and penalties at present don't offer any hope of dealing with it.

It's going to take some serious commitment and lobbying.

**SS90** · 24th August 2009, 09:49

Originally Posted by peasea

Excuse me!

Paul Homo is using his media clout here and I'd expect his daughter to get a far lesser sentence than Fartoo Big Alofa in Otara for the same crime. Watch this space.

"What P has done to that girl" is nothing compared to what it does to people without the money to buy good treatment and good lawyers. Sure Millie might have a problem but it's the same problem that thousands of other kiwis have.

If Paul Holmes was half a journalist he'd be utilising his riches, hunting down the P cooks and getting the best lawyers in the land to lock them up.

Like the law-enforcement agencies in NZ Mister Holmes will pay lip service to the problem at its root and grandstand when it suits.

I have to agree with you on that one mate.

Sadly, the preferential treatment provided to those people who have "clout" in the right circles is quite sick.

anyway, why the Hell does Paul Bloody Holmes have any clout with the police/Judicery?

Who is Paul Holmes? Just an overpaid Narcisic TV presenter, nothing more.

Not that a few lines on an internet thread will change anything, but it is pretty sad that a "celeb" (use that term in it's loosest possible form) has ANY sway whatso ever with such organisations.

What power does he have?

The relality is, Mille Holmes will be unlikely to spend any time in Jail, POSSIBLY because her Dad is Paul Holmes.

Reading a few other interviews with her today, she claims she never paid for her $1000 a day "habit"

I may be being a little cynical/unsensitive, but I am of the opinion that her "$1000 a day P addiction" is more of an exaggeration than reality.

$1000 a day? granted, that is a realistic cost for a P addict.......but, I just can't shake the nagging feeling that she is "playing it up a bit" for the papers when it come to the extent of her addiction....

maybe I'm wrong

**Lias** · 24th August 2009, 10:00

Originally Posted by Hitcher

Legalising, as you suggest, makes drugs socially acceptable.

Drugs ARE socially acceptable to a lot of people.

Originally Posted by Hitcher

If crystal meth was as available and as acceptable as alcohol, those of us who remained sober would be heavily armed and living in fortified compounds.

You make that sound like a bad thing. Sadly big brother frowns on fortifying your house and assumes your a gangmember or some such.

**wbks** · 24th August 2009, 10:03

Originally Posted by Lias

Drugs ARE socially acceptable to a lot of people.

.

Yea. Aren't NZers the highest marijuana smokers based on percentage of population? Sounds pretty acceptable to me... I know it sounds stupid saying "gateway drug gateway drug", but you'd be surprised how many people are anti drugs, but after they get stoned, they do it a bit more finding out its not that bad, then shrooms, then gradually more heavy shit, so it does seem to have that effect

**Pixie** · 24th August 2009, 11:38

Substance abusers are shit heads.I only give a fuck about their sordid little lives when they impinge on mine.
It's a pity the chemicals they abuse don't kill them more quickly

**RantyDave** · 24th August 2009, 11:54

Originally Posted by Hitcher

The thing that startles me most about a lot of this is the willingness that most have to bung all manner of shit in their body that has, at best, been lightly tossed together by Dwayne (who failed NCEA science) on a barbecue in his garage in Dargaville. Given the passion that society has to demand country-of-origin labelling, Heart Foundation ticks, % daily allowance, and all manner of other nanny state conditions on everything else they ingest, I find this a massive contradiction.

I think you'll find the consumers of Dwayne's handiwork and organic phosphate free traceable origin unsaturated fat only for my special little snowflake market are entirely separate. I also think you'll find most weed consumers know a lot more about the quality and growing conditions of that particular product than anything ingested without breaking the law. I'd also argue that since most 'recreational' drugs have no biological element to them that passing on a disease, along a vector that is usually burned, would be extremely difficult. (hepatitis from the crack pipe itself, sure)

Other than that a guarantee as to the quality and content of recreational pharmaceuticals is but one of the advantages their legalisation will eventually bring. Eventually. I guess we're talking "children's children" at this stage though.

Dave

**ynot slow** · 24th August 2009, 12:27

She is a spoilt brat,her mum hitched up with Holmes for the gravy run,seemed to me when little Millie was older(16 or so)decided I'll leave him now our future is secure.

Maybe the fact that sending kids to naughty corner didn't work,sure Holmes doesn't deserve the shit,but he could say she's NOT my daughter,let her Dad look after her.