Cannabis legalisation

[spudchucka]

Excuse me, but just because I smoke it doesn`t make me a `pothead`. I take exception to your statement, and am actually disappointed by it. But nonetheless, I won`t let it bother me any further.

I get called a pig, (amongst other things) directly all the time on this forum, my comment was not aimed at you directly, it was just a generalisation.

I don't take any exception to name calling generally, until it gets really personal; so I'm pleased that you won't let it bother you beyond the post you made about it.

[Smoggie]

Still prefer a good cigar and glass of single malt.

[Patrick]

... Saves them having to go planting little white bags of milk sugar powder on people they then allege is class A in the hope of gathering intelligence re harder drugs, like how CHCH drug squad must stoop to do.

Yeah, riiiiiiiiiight.....

First hand experience? Or another urban fairytale or myth....... or was it something you saw on "The Shield" or a video???

I think I saw that episode in "The Shield."

[SixPackBack]

...................

[idleidolidyll]

How disappointing:

I posted the direct link to the NZ Health Committee Report, New Zealand's last major investigation into the 'harm' of cannabis, as well as the Government reply to their own report AND a link to scientific reports on a database at New Scientist.............then what happens?

The naysayers still bleat on with their predjudices, their silly context free anecdotes and none seem to have bothered reading anything.

Once again for those too lazy to read:

Apart from similar damage to young brains still being formed as that which alcohol, tobacco and pharmaceuticals cause, there is no evidence of real harm caused by cannabis long term or short term.
In addition: the harm that IS caused is not caused by the drug itself but by the overzealous policing of the drug.

Why isn't it legal?

Because criminals don't want it legal, that would kill their business.

Because big busibess doesn't want it legal, they can't make money from it and it would hurt other busu=iness.

Because bigotted people are ignorant of the facts and although they are likely to indulge in worse drugs like alcohol and tobacco, they refuse to let others have their harmless drug of choice.

Because a number of religious crackpots don't like it.

Because Police don't like it, even though they indulge in worse drugs and it would take away their jobs.

Most importantly though, cannabis is illegal becasuse politicians refuse to accept the findings of three government initiated investigations into it and don't have the balls to tell the groups above to fuck off.

[Grahameeboy]

How disappointing:

I posted the direct link to the NZ Health Committee Report, New Zealand's last major investigation into the 'harm' of cannabis, as well as the Government reply to their own report AND a link to scientific reports on a database at New Scientist.............then what happens?

The naysayers still bleat on with their predjudices, their silly context free anecdotes and none seem to have bothered reading anything.

Once again for those too lazy to read:

Apart from similar damage to young brains still being formed as that which alcohol, tobacco and pharmaceuticals cause, there is no evidence of real harm caused by cannabis long term or short term.
In addition: the harm that IS caused is not caused by the drug itself but by the overzealous policing of the drug.

Why isn't it legal?

Because criminals don't want it legal, that would kill their business.

Because big busibess doesn't want it legal, they can't make money from it and it would hurt other busu=iness.

Because bigotted people are ignorant of the facts and although they are likely to indulge in worse drugs like alcohol and tobacco, they refuse to let others have their harmless drug of choice.

Because a number of religious crackpots don't like it.

Because Police don't like it, even though they indulge in worse drugs and it would take away their jobs.

Most importantly though, cannabis is illegal becasuse politicians refuse to accept the findings of three government initiated investigations into it and don't have the balls to tell the groups above to fuck off.

The North Shore Times has an article along these lines too..

[idleidolidyll]

So back to the original question:

No, ya don't need to support ALCP at elections to promote sensible cannabis laws.

Your choices could be:

ACLP: legalise
Greens: decriminlaise
Labour: possibility of decriminalisation
National: no posibility of any sensible laws
ACT: decriminalise
NZ First: who cares, they're a dead duck

[jahrasti]

If you are in/going for a job and test positive then that can effect your employment, But if you could smoke, there have to be a level that is acceptable so if you drive your truck on the road or whateva if you had had a joint 8 hrs before( same way rule of thumb about stopping drinking 8 hrs before to sober up) could it be proven whether you were under the influence.
Look at Carter Holt when they started introducing testing, the accident rate dropped significantly, as we all know the bush workers used to/Probably still do smoke up a storm.
I think it should be decriminalised socially but concerned about the work place environment as like piss someone stoned could easily make a fuck up that costs lives that if they were straight might not have happened.

[Storm]

I think it should be decriminalised socially but concerned about the work place environment as like piss someone stoned could easily make a fuck up that costs lives that if they were straight might not have happened.

I'm with him- I dont want someone who'se head is f%^k knows where in the clouds operating machinery or playing with electricity anywhere near me

[idleidolidyll]

I'm with him- I dont want someone who'se head is f%^k knows where in the clouds operating machinery or playing with electricity anywhere near me

i doubt many at all would like someone in charge of anything that could do damage or kill someone, stoned, pissed or in any other way incapacitiated and unable to think and act clearly.

that however, is not an argument against decriminalisation or legalisation, it's an argument for education and control to a similar degree as alcohol and tobacco etc.

the bullshit part of the current drug testing is that even a month after someone has smoked a joint, traces remain and these traces, although causing no noticable impariment, are being used to ban people racing motorcycles, ban them from certain work etc.

However, someone with a massive hangover from a drunk the day before is quite likely to be legally able to drive, operate machinery and put people in danger.

[Mole_C]

Look at Carter Holt when they started introducing testing, the accident rate dropped significantly, as we all know the bush workers used to/Probably still do smoke up a storm.

Could just be because health and safety have cracked down on all unsafe practises in general. But i do agree, just like drinking and working you should not smoke and work. However these drug tests should not be able to make you loose your job just because you want to have a smoke in the weekend like they do now.

[jahrasti]

Could just be because health and safety have cracked down on all unsafe practises in general. But i do agree, just like drinking and working you should not smoke and work. However these drug tests should not be able to make you loose your job just because you want to have a smoke in the weekend like they do now.

Thats what I was trying to say, if it was legal there needs to be a conclusive test like the alcohol breath test.

[jahrasti]

[QUOTE=idleidolidyll;1005597]i doubt many at all would like someone in charge of anything that could do damage or kill someone, stoned, pissed or in any other way incapacitiated and unable to think and act clearly.

that however, is not an argument against decriminalisation or legalisation, it's an argument for education and control to a similar degree as alcohol and tobacco etc.

the bullshit part of the current drug testing is that even a month after someone has smoked a joint, traces remain and these traces, although causing no noticable impariment, are being used to ban people racing motorcycles, ban them from certain work etc.[

However, someone with a massive hangover from a drunk the day before is quite likely to be legally able to drive, operate machinery and put people in danger.

, But if you could smoke, there have to be a level that is acceptable so if you drive your truck on the road or whateva if you had had a joint 8 hrs before( same way rule of thumb about stopping drinking 8 hrs before to sober up) QUOTE]

Thats my point

[avgas]

Another comment I take exception to. It may have `fucked` you up, but it sure as hell ain`t fucking me up. Speak for yourself. I know people who have been `fucked up` because of motorbikes, cars, crossing the road, drinking alcohol. Just because some have, doesn`t mean that applies to everyone.

Sorry OAB, it wasn't aimed at dope smokers, but people in general. More a case of "You choose your own poison in life". We all do stuff in our lives which isnt good for us. That is the purpose of living. Sorry again if you took this personally - it was just a response for the naysayers on this forum who seem to take offense because people smoke dope. Trying to explain to them that 'they' (as in anyone) can choose what ever 'they' to do with their lives so long as 'they' dont mess with yours.
Dope doesn't fuck you up when you smoke it. It fucks you up when you try and quit. But then again so does everything in the world.

[candor]

Yeah, riiiiiiiiiight.....

First hand experience? Or another urban fairytale or myth....... or was it something you saw on "The Shield" or a video???

I think I saw that episode in "The Shield."

First hand experience. PCA complaint filed in 2000.

My report in brief Officer. Went to Paparua Prison to visit my cousin who was inside in relation to a million dollar cocaine haul either that lag or the one shortly before it ("L Minhinnick his name - front page CHCH Press late 1980's).

I was working at Sunnyside Hospital as afternoon floating pool nurse. It was only my second visit in jail to this relative on a long lag but I never made it. Inside the gate the drug squad had set up a checkpoint. I got out of car as requested and the moronic looking dog handler nudged his dog toward me.

It wagged its tail and edged forward then the moron said "indications of drugs on this one". WTF! I was taken to a tent and searched with my back to the car. On my return one cop was removing a bottle of stuff called AA that druggies use from my boot before my very eyes.

Another one was pulling a bag of white powder and two panadol pills out of my handbag. Only the panadol pills were there originally.

A thirtyish blonde headed short slight blue eyed bastard in mufti called Dean Burrel (?sp) who was apparently the head of the drug squad took me aside and aggressively informed me that it appeared they had found some class A in my possession and that would be very bad for me being a nurse wouldn't it.

This fore knowledge of my career background put a very fine point on it of the fact it was a set up. I told the wanker that I do not take drugs, never have apart from the usual couple of puffs as a teenager so I would not have a clue what it was but that I'm sure he knew since it all belonged to him.

I was not arrested or charged. I was prevented from visiting my cousin that day and have not since. I am today in a quandary as I'd LIKE to visit him as he is back inside again butI'm not willing to risk harrassment.

I told Dean Burrel to drug test me with a urine tst if he had ne to prove I'm nit a druggy and that he is barking up the wrong tree. I left and went straightaway to a Dr and got a urine and blood drug test on advice of senior nurse friends in case it was needed as character evidence in court.

Burrel then proceeded to telephone me several times over the next 2 weeks saying that if I wanted to avoid a hefty imprisonment whch is the natural outcome of class A then I'd be co-operative and come in to the station to talk some things through.

All I could find out from others was that they suspected the person I was visiting had some money as proceeds of crime stashed away, and that cops had been trying to track it down. Prolly this was there main interest??

My lawyer Nick Routt in CHCH said not to go and talk to them. Next time Burrel rang I asked if they had got the stuff tested so we knew what it was. He said 'testing is expensive - we're just hoping you'll tell us'. I said well I'm hoping you'll tell me since its yours. He then kept saying that I must know a few things if I know Minhinnick.

I assured him that apart from knowing Minhinnick is related I did not know his criminal business but even if did I'm better raised than to tattle as my grandfather was in the war and very clear on that.

Burrel was quite nasty and kept threatening that I'd lose my career. I felt both angry and intimidated and treated him like the shit he is. He said if I won't come to the station can he come visit me. I said certainly not.

In the end in one last phone call he said that the (planted) material had been analysed. One thing was a bottle of AA (stuff used to make homebake but not illicit apparently), the other was ?galactose which he said was milk sugar used to cut cocaine. "But you already knew that I said" and requested a copy of the ESR analyses results which he never was able to produce.

The wanka had to have the last word and said 'well we know these items are not innocent and that this does go to show you are involved etc etc"
On that note we said goodbye. I went to Police complaints authority. They were typically useless but it is apparently still worth doing it said my lawyer as then patterns can be noticed with bad cops like burrell.

Burrel was doing some anti drug speeches re P lately. The local Maoris were a bit dubious of him. I told them his form at a marae and he quick lost credibility. My advice to young cops is that if you want to be effective don't be dirty! Its NOT nice.

Burrel really picked on the wrong person. I am a anti drug as it gets. I know lots of druggies who can testify that they have tried to get drugs out of me (the type nurses can pinch with great risk and difficulty). I always said NO, plus I'm pretty famous for being a non drug user. What a twit.

Dean Burrel - DB must stand for dum blonde. The ends does not justify the means tho I'd support cops that played with evidence or used dirty tricks to nail rapists and killers. Not just to nab dealer addicts and further their careers tho! Integrity has to kick in at some point.