Drug busts!

[marmel]

I beginning to think that all these weed threads should be merged just as waving threads are. The arguments never change, the reasons for and against never change, and never in the history of the internet has someone from either staunch supporters camp posted 'You know what, you have a very valid point there, I've changed my opinion solely based on what you said and now side fully with you.'

Well said that man.

[98tls]

I found this in another "Google" ...

THC is specific to weed- the cannabinoid family of chemicals are found throughout nature in plants and animals- the chemical conformation (shape) allows for the THC molecules to bind to specific cell sites that produce neurotransmitters that ultimately give you the specific feeling of being baked. Some other cannabinoids can also do this, as they mimic other receptors that closely resemble the conformation and content of the THC receptor. This may not produce a feeling of euphoria, necessarily, but may have some other effects that cause altered sensory throughput and behavioral changes... some you might like, some you definitely wouldn't.

Or ..........................

[mashman]

While I don't really care whom smokes dope - I am a stickler for the facts. And abusing others when you don't have your facts correct should really be a no no.

AEA is similar to THC as adrenalin is similar to P.

Just because they are in the same compound group does not mean they are the same.

Hey, the abuse of people and the abuse of terminology are two entirely different facts.

Ooooooooooooooooh ok.

Fair enough, I stand corrected... now go fuck yourself.

[mashman]

Even if "tens of thousands" of people complained about police enforcing cannabis laws police still can't change the law.

Now imagine if "tens of thousands" of people started an email campaign to the PM or organised marches, much more effective.

They could if they decided not to enforce the law. Yes that does not mean the law has actually been changed... but if it isn't used by those who enforce the law, then technically the law has been changed iykwim.

Like ACC?

[marmel]

They could if they decided not to enforce the law. Yes that does not mean the law has actually been changed... but if it isn't used by those who enforce the law, then technically the law has been changed iykwim.

Like ACC?

You rapidly get into dangerous territory there though, the police deciding which laws to enforce and which to ignore sounds like a pretty bad idea.

[mashman]

You rapidly get into dangerous territory there though, the police deciding which laws to enforce and which to ignore sounds like a pretty bad idea.

Someone did mention that they do already and they call it discretion... albeit he called it descretion

[FJRider]

Or ..........................

I like ........

[marmel]

Someone did mention that they do already and they call it discretion... albeit he called it descretion

Yeah, I know that with small quantities it's not unusual to see a bit get flushed down the toilet/drain and a quiet word given to the owner. Time place and circumstances dictate what action will be taken though.

The thing is discretion is supposed to be a police officers choice but it's not in a lot of cases. National police policy dictates what happens in most cases, if they get caught ignoring "policy' they can get in the shit themselves.

[GrayWolf]

That means fuck all. Cannabis is detectable in the bloodstream for up to several weeks after ingestion. Any evidence to prove that the user was currently under the influence at the time of the accident is purely circumstantial at best.

I never said that everyone should sesh up and drive, I was meaning that cannabis does not DIRECTLY cause death. It does not cause stress to any organ in the way that alcohol, paracetamol, caffeine, or most prescription medicine causes.

It is also detectable in the body fat for up to 3 months after use.... however, the 'mere' fact it would be detectable in the bloodstream for several weeks would in my case (work) and any other person involved in a 'safety critical' industry, get you instantly 'stood down' and likely put on a drug rehab course, or be sacked!

[mashman]

Yeah, I know that with small quantities it's not unusual to see a bit get flushed down the toilet/drain and a quiet word given to the owner. Time place and circumstances dictate what action will be taken though.

The thing is discretion is supposed to be a police officers choice but it's not in a lot of cases. National police policy dictates what happens in most cases, if they get caught ignoring "policy' they can get in the shit themselves.

Absolutely... although I would imagine that the policy makers would have a bit of a trouble should the hierarchy decide to back their officers in an "alternative" policy. Should the Police decide to honour the "wishes" of the people (should we wish decriminalisation/legalisation as a majority) I would have thought that the policy makers would then be able to change the law without any issues. Granted the sun may turn pink and night will never fall again. I'd say that Police have more of a chance of changing drug policy than any group in NZ?

[flyingcrocodile46]

It is also detectable in the body fat for up to 3 months after use.... however, the 'mere' fact it would be detectable in the bloodstream for several weeks would in my case (work) and any other person involved in a 'safety critical' industry, get you instantly 'stood down' and likely put on a drug rehab course, or be sacked!

I've heard that it can be measured in hair strands for up to six months

[marmel]

Absolutely... although I would imagine that the policy makers would have a bit of a trouble should the hierarchy decide to back their officers in an "alternative" policy. Should the Police decide to honour the "wishes" of the people (should we wish decriminalisation/legalisation as a majority) I would have thought that the policy makers would then be able to change the law without any issues. Granted the sun may turn pink and night will never fall again. I'd say that Police have more of a chance of changing drug policy than any group in NZ?

One of the reasons that the kiwi police are well respected on world terms is that their history is to be independant from government which in theory means there is less corruption. I can't think of anything worse than some of the american states which vote in sherrifs who can end up owing all kinds of favours.

So I wouldn't want police in NZ to change policy, I think that has to come from public pressure and the flow on from that is the police being told "this is how we want you to do things now".

In saying that police do have a say in some policy decisions normally at select committee level and the like. I think this is more to provide stats/experience from the frontline. I do think though that recently there has been a bit of a shift for the top brass to be a bit more outspoken especially with the alcohol reforms previously mentioned.

2nd gold medal for the kiwis too!

[Berries]

This thread makes me want to have a joint.

[mashman]

One of the reasons that the kiwi police are well respected on world terms is that their history is to be independant from government which in theory means there is less corruption. I can't think of anything worse than some of the american states which vote in sherrifs who can end up owing all kinds of favours.

So I wouldn't want police in NZ to change policy, I think that has to come from public pressure and the flow on from that is the police being told "this is how we want you to do things now".

In saying that police do have a say in some policy decisions normally at select committee level and the like. I think this is more to provide stats/experience from the frontline. I do think though that recently there has been a bit of a shift for the top brass to be a bit more outspoken especially with the alcohol reforms previously mentioned.

2nd gold medal for the kiwis too!

Fair enough, but in the light of there being no sensible law in regards to recreational drug use I would not have a problem with the Police "leading" the way (by not enforcing the law) on the policy. After all the govt seeks advice on all sorts of matters from various agencies. Let's make some money out of it, get it out in the open once and for all and get on with the education of use and not abuse, as well as paying for funding for more accurate testing. I'm all for a simple effective test to prove that you're not "impaired" at work as I think everyone would agree that there can be consequences to any form of substance abuse. Turn the drug dealers into tax paying employed citizens. The supply chain is already in place and is "servicing" a need" and the demand is already in place, but the political will isn't there irrespective of what people would "like". If the Police "kick" such a policy off, the political will will follow. I just don't see people being listened too as they're always driving a personal agenda and the advocate groups have yet to apply sufficient pressure to change the minds of the govt, irrespective of support. Who knows, people may actually use cannabis responsibly as plenty currently do. ?100? years of fuckin around, locking people up, demonising "users" and wasting huge amounts of tax payers money for something that was banned because it provided industry with a product that gave them an unfair advantage does not make sense... especially when there are legal alternatives that are utterly feckin dangerous and untested. The US are having a mare with bath salts (nasty stuff by the sounds of it) and recently there was a report stating that keeping tabs of legal highs was akin to pissing in the wind. Release the tried and trusted on health grounds if nothing else, I'm sure even Ed would agree that the lesser of 2 evils would be preferable

Good on Mahe, must be a hell of a relief to finally have that medal under his belt.

[Road kill]

I've heard that it can be measured in hair strands for up to six months

For as long as that strand of hair is still on your head.
In which case I wouldn't have much to worry about