Friendly warning and disclaimer: These forums are provided for the thousands victims of prohibition who form the pot community of Aotearoa for discussion of marijuana-related issues. NORML reserve the right to delete off-topic posts. The views expressed in any forum are solely those of the contributor and not necessarily approved or endorsed by NORML New Zealand Inc.
Joined: Feb 19, 2004 Posts: 1344 Location: Nelson area
Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 10:32 am
Tony wrote:
Steveoh,
with a bit of luck when Judge Jerry Paradis , one of the movers and shakers of LEAP comes down to NZ soon a few more cops might be encouraged to speak out.
Its actually not easy for them in the current climate..
Yes I agree. I didn't mean for them to publicly speak out, you would have to be suicidal (career wise that is) to do that. What I mean is privately, it is unfair to expect everyone to come out publicly, because everyone carries their own baggage and fears. It's the old case of horses and water. All we need to do is show them the water. Because whether you are a cop, judge, doctor, or what ever, you have the ability to vote. plant a seed and maybe a hindi-coosh will grow
I think the bottom line is if people can see that there is an alternative to the problem, the chance is they will consider it as an option. Currently no one's offering an option. So no one considers one.
It can not be Prohibition or Legalisation. There has to be managing structure. People fear that to let a drug run free throughout society will be equivalent to opening Pandora's box.
Offering a "responsible" management design, that protects the ones that need protecting, acknowledging the social impacts of the drug (little compared to the other socially accepted drugs), without stigmatising users or criminalising them.
Since I have been pushing this line of debate in cannabis law reform, I have received very little opposition, in fact I have more people on this site opposed to this design, than in the real world.
I am not a stupid person, or pig headed in the face of adversary, if it is overwhelming. So including the summer I spent at the markets, talking and debating the aspects of cannabis and prohibition, with young people, old people, and tourist from other countries, for, and against. If my idea was so wrong or I garnered no support, then I would have changed my tact.
It is silly not to, especially in an election year when we can do so much, for us to push a package that is palatable to the largest possible audience.
When we cannibalise ourselves through arguing over fine, fractal, minute details, in policies that are not even thought of yet, or need to be. We are not seen as a force to be reckoned with and the statistics say we are 373,310 New Zealanders used cannabis in 2005/06.
This New Zealand Illicit Drug Harm Index could be a boom for us, as it shows (conservative as it is) THE COSTS OF PROHIBITION This is a message that needs to be spread widely. Old Jimbo did his best to stir up prohibition fears by "pre-releasing" the cost's of cannabis, then not promoting it when it was released. Maybe we need someone to (if they have time) to go through the whole report (re; cannabis) and see if we can drop that cost more.
I have this builder guy in my area, who always says the same thing to me "You need to point out to people how its hurting their pocket".
So, we shown them a design that will (Listed in importance to non-smokers):
- cost them less (currently 115+ million every year).
- make taxable money from it.
- Protect young people and people at risk (better than prohibition does now).
- and the fear card......Stop gangs from funding their "P" production
If we can remove the "fear" that handicaps people from making a sensible decision, then we WIN, then we can get on with our lives.
I am dedicated to cannabis reform, but I don't want it to be my life
I'll post the mail Wednesday
Steven _________________ Regulation will set cannabis free
Freedom's just a TICK away - VOTE Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party 2008 then everyone's a winner
Contact me: steven@alcp.org.nz Party website http://www.alcp.org.nz
It really is a battle for hearts and minds Steveoh,
The reality is those actively opposed to CLR / regulation in NZ is only a very small minority ..
A few using it to blame someones downfall on because the truth hurts too much .
Others listening to the word of false prophets and mistakenly think god is against cannabis.
Some ,and possibly rightly so consider any drug should not need be required.. but reality rules .. coffee, cannabis , aspro , alcohol and a few million others are here to stay.
Then of far more consequence are the Pharmaceutical companies, The Tobacco companies, The Petrochemical Companies and last but not least the booze companies.. and again profit driven , just different prophets/profits .
There is millions at stake , thats profit not turnover By the sort of industry who have already proven just how unscrupulous a drug dealer they can be at times.In fact as a group they represent some of the most corrupted industries there is .
Next to the arms and class A drug dealers these groups are top of the list for bribes and corruption of politicians,world wide..
Just look at one small set of circumstances ,Crosby Textor a firm of PR/ Spin Doctors ( dirty tricks ) have the ear of John Key , well should I say the mouth ... But the same Crosby Textor receive considerable sums from The British American Tobacco Company for helping to ensure tobacco does not suffer from the wrath of the political .
But it gets worse Crosby Textor are also connected to both Owen Glen who contracts to The British American Tobacco Company and not only donates half a million to the labour party but lends them a considerable sum as well we know of..Who then someone organizes a building at the Auckland uni to be named after.. These tobacco companies have deep pockets..
The labour Party for some reason did a complete U turn on CLR even medical , using the coalition agreement as an excuse ..
Shame the ALCP could not afford to contract Crosby Textor ...
Back to the point..
As I said before , most are not against us.. just the few.
But those who are not against ,for the most part have no reason to actually make it known how they stand.It only tends to complicate things for them.
Its the ability of the enemy to manipulate with favors an environment that creates victims out of those who support CLR ,Be it Politicians, Researchers , media , Public Servants , CLR activists and medical users
We might well have the hearts and minds but they have them by the balls ..
There is no way CLR can compete at the Politician or senior Public Servant level with the Commercial prohibitionists , it can only be bottom up . we need to find away of encouraging those who don't care to care..
It is best done by showing them whats in it for them.. How much the failed DEA policy cost , how much that could not only be saved , but with tax/ regulation how in fact the ledger goes from red to black rather significantly..Even the most conservative estimates of saving for Pharmac are in the Hundreds of millions once medpot is fully appreciated ..
Its not just the money , but even the release of the cops from cottage / minor possessions cannabis offenses , freeing up of courts and jails.. let them more time to focus on real crime ..How much safer the streets will be with a few cannabis smokers smiling about but far fewer drunks, Druggies and crims out and about.
Might even help create more vacant hospital beds for elective surgery .
Perhaps even suggest that we might have an AllBlack team that can stay sober and out of trouble , a few more basket ball players and less league guys in toruble..And our cricketers might be able to play longer than one day..
I can still remember an MP , not a supportive one at that telling me 4 yrs ago CLR was a forgone conclusion . Since half the country smoked the stuff and over 20% did regularly and most of the rest did not care , nothing could stop it..The research coming through was too overwhelming in support of CLR..
Gangs . . . the very word can bring an adverse reaction from most New Zealanders. Why? Simply because of the crime gangs are associated with. The petty crimes, most people can live with, but the crimes of violence, no matter who they are against, turn the wrath of the nation on the gangs. But there are crimes being committed against innocent women and children by New Zealanders that would make many gang members sick. And the extent of bullying going on in schools is, perhaps, the beginning of a gang culture that has a sickness about it, as it leads to grief and even the death of those subjected to it.
How do we counter it? Tougher measures? Better parenting? More emphasis on Christian values in education? More police on the streets? We could fill dozens of editorial columns with suggestions and arguments and never get it right. It is wrong, for instance, for us to think that because someone is in a gang, he has no sense of decency or fair play. True, there have been far too many crimes involving gangs for anyone to claim that they are squeaky clean.
But there is a sense of loyalty in gangs, even though it is often accompanied by misdirected suspicion of society and aggression towards the police and the general structure of law and order as we have it in New Zealand today. Imagine if all that gang energy and misguided direction were channelled willingly into making this country a better and safer place for all New Zealanders . . . and that includes them and their children and later their grandchildren. If an amnesty were called and gang leaders were brought together with police and community leaders, it might bring about the break-through the country needs.
A select committee was told this week that gang-member estimates had not included those in prison. The Police Association estimates gang numbers could be as high as 60,000, including associates and 6000 full gang members.
We need to restore that sense of patriotism and nationhood that got us through two world wars.
Joined: Feb 19, 2004 Posts: 1344 Location: Nelson area
Posted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 12:49 pm
Cannabis production
Dear sir,
I recall in early May, I wrote a letter pointing out that less that 10% of young teens from the Netherlands had ever tried cannabis. These figures were from a 2004 study. Now another study has elaborated on these figures - 7% of teens from Holland, compared with 27% of New Zealand teens, have tried cannabis.
The question is, does prohibition protect or harm our young teens? The facts say, harm.
This is an election year, so why don't you ask your representatives and the "want to be's" to explain why we continue to follow a (forced upon us) regime called prohibition, when regulation is proven (look at Holland) in protecting young teens from the harm of drugs?
As a society, is our concern in protecting our youth and inhibiting the ability of gangs to fund their "P" production, or is it really to ensure the monopolised profit making of the pharmaceutical industry?
The resent released Drug Harm Index brings home the "conservative" yearly cost of prohibition -$115 million. If you had a business that was failing, would you "keep on keeping on" or change your operation? So why do we, when it comes to our children continue failing them?
Steven Wilkinson
Nelson Mail 11/07/08 _________________ Regulation will set cannabis free
Freedom's just a TICK away - VOTE Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party 2008 then everyone's a winner
Contact me: steven@alcp.org.nz Party website http://www.alcp.org.nz
Joined: Feb 19, 2004 Posts: 1344 Location: Nelson area
Posted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 4:00 pm
resubmit _________________ Regulation will set cannabis free
Freedom's just a TICK away - VOTE Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party 2008 then everyone's a winner
Contact me: steven@alcp.org.nz Party website http://www.alcp.org.nz
I haven't deleted a post recently, u sure it was in this thread ?
Yes, it was in response to steveoh's post on July 8th.
I submitted it the next day (Wednesday) and I can remember seeing it in the "Latest Posts" on the Norml home page when I'd finished.
I was just surprised that it had seemingly disappeared, and a bit annoyed because of the wasted effort.
Now I'm just curious as to what happened to it.
I've never deleted a post before but I figure that it would be hard for me to do it accidentally without realising.
Joined: Dec 01, 2003 Posts: 2996 Location: Christchurch, NZ
Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2008 3:32 pm
Quote:
Now I'm just curious as to what happened to it.
I've never deleted a post before but I figure that it would be hard for me to do it accidentally without realising.
Hmm, I'm curious too, but guess I should admit to having once accidentally deleted my own post I hit preview instead of submit and closed the tab, instantly realising what I'd done but too late, I hit back but it was goneburger I sure am more alert in mornings, pity my body prefers late nights instead. Sorry about your lost post, I don't know what happened, but definately wasn't me.
Last edited by paula on Mon Jul 14, 2008 6:33 pm, edited 1 time in total
Thanks for the feedback, Paula.
Like yourself, I've also lost the odd post in the past but was aware of what was happening at the time (I've since discovered that some posts can be recovered by using the "Back" function).
However, in this case I feel certain that the post was submitted successfully which is why I was so surprised that it had disappeared.
Anyway, I've had similar things happen in the past and I wasn't able to find out what happened then either.
In the end "the vagaries of the Internet" seem to be the best explanation for such events.
Sir, in regard to the matter of Mathew Parrott, the Kaiteriteri man charged with cannabis offences, I would like to say that seven kilograms is not an excessive amount. I could quite easily buy seven kilos of coffee at the shop despite it being more dangerous than marijuana.
The Ministry of Health now acknowledges the therapeutic value of cannabis use; therefore this man was providing a vital service to the community. He is however foolish for pleading guilty to such an illegitimate law, as this only serves to encourage the minions of prohibition.
Julian Crawford
Nelson
Nelson Mail 28/8/08
Dear sir,
I was wondering your reasoning when forming the headline for the conviction of a local cannabis grower (Nelson Mail, August 26), mentioning that the operation was worth $145,800 a year. Was this to highlight the fact that the Government lost out on more than $17,000 in tax, and will end up paying out many tens of thousands to keep him in jail?
This man's operation is not the only one, or even a large one. He seems like an average guy, no gang affiliation mentioned. The only thing making him a criminal? The current law on cannabis.
In the recently released Illicit Drug Harm Index, it states that in 2006 the police seized 33,480kilograms of cannabis with a street value of $295 million, remembering that police remove less than a quarter of all cannabis grown.
It's interesting how our government ignores a large taxable resource just to appease Mom, apple-pie, and the American way. Sometimes it feels that we live in an occupied country.
Maybe we should add the cannabis question into the upcoming postal referendum.
Lets ask the people of New Zealand, under the protection of a secret ballot: would you rather see regulation of cannabis instead of prohibition?
Joined: Feb 19, 2004 Posts: 1344 Location: Nelson area
Posted: Tue Sep 02, 2008 12:55 pm
Bold type is what was edited.
Dear sir,
Friday afternoon, Marion Wearing was reported by radio National as saying: "All parties will not want the pedicoat raised too high around the issue of political donations. I myself know and have heard scuttle-bug, on all the parties." This was said in relation to what's farce-ly becoming a political fiasco.
What has our political landscape come to? Is it time to seriously look at State-funded "only" election campaigns? When all parties that have been registered, and contested 4 consecutive elections, receive equal funding. I personally would like to see Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party have to same amount of funding as Labour would, to get their message heard by all New Zealanders.
I think we would have to be living in the land of "La La", to believe that New Zealand First is the only guilty party.
I say want something done? vote for it. Because being allowed to "pay for it" makes the process unfair. We all have one vote, and wealth should not be not a privilege. Doesn't a democratic country needs to be democratic in it's process. Not manipulated.
Steven Wilkinson
The Press 01/09/08 _________________ Regulation will set cannabis free
Freedom's just a TICK away - VOTE Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party 2008 then everyone's a winner
Contact me: steven@alcp.org.nz Party website http://www.alcp.org.nz
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Login to check your private messages
Login
resubmit
I hit preview instead of submit and closed the tab, instantly realising what I'd done but too late, I hit back but it was goneburger 
