Dont legalize it!

[Joe]

I see ya point mate, but I hate social control by legislation (not just grass, but many things), so I just don't agree. But I do see ya point.

 

Basically, some good can come from bad things I guess, like pot being a crime. But I still would like to see pot legalised myslef.

 

I totally agree, from a personal perspective. as I type I can hear a low flying plane, but at first it sounded like a chopper - some of the paranoia people get around here. I get it even if I have no mull in the backyard. Its a dodgy thing to do hassle your citizens with low flying helicopters.

 

If it was legal we wouldn't have to put up with that crap.

 

But I had never thought of that side of legalisation that the farmer brought up, I guess there are always more sides to a story than we expect.

[Tom]

Its a dodgy thing to do hassle your citizens with low flying helicopters.

Not a problem in Tassie, the cops here can't afford a helicopter. ::

 

http://www.gamers-forums.com/smilies/contrib/ruinkai/coolgleamA.gif

[RobbieGanjaSeed]

No choppers....I'm on my way Tom, ..on my way.

[serotonin]

hey

 

i guess there a number of concerns regarding the legalisation of marijuana,...

 

if it was legalised, i think that a lot of people would slow down, and relax a bit more, but stress may be replaced by amotivational syndrome...

 

it would also make it much easier for school kids to grab a hold of mj... (i'm one of those people who think people in year 8 shouldn't be smoking, even though they do)

 

also, driving: (i try to keep driving to a minimum when bent, and when i do drive, it is late at night, on my way home when there are hardly any cars, or driving to get much needed food...) anyway think driving needs to be addressed... perhaps some test, if you can walk straight or hop on the spot or,... you get the idea. oh, or some rta program "learn to drive whilst stoned"

 

was also thinking that perhaps we could follow some of the regulations etc that the dutch use... don't know how they go about it, but Mr G Bush hasn't sent in a shitload of marines in there *bites tongue* so it must be working on some level...

 

all i'm saying is that it would be blind to jus go ahead and legalise mary, but at the same time it doesn't deserve the harsh label it's been given...

 

So... perhaps you can add your thoughts, am in favour of presenting ideas and solutions rather than seeing those over-sensationalised protests on the news. That just gives the cannabis community a bad reputation... Outsiders have this stereotype that pot-smokers are these low-lives who smoke, steal and all this other bull sh*t... and i'm sick of saying i don't smoke, why should i hide my recreational use because of their mis perceptions...

 

going of topic..., hopefully some constructive stuff will come of this, and maybe one day we won't have to fear the police... speaking of the police, we have to remember that the police don't make the laws, they merely enforce them... it's like complaining to someone who doesn't have the power to change things... we should be writing letters, petitions, etc to those in power, namely the politicians

 

also think that scientific studies should be done to explore the effects of cannabis on humans, but there's always that ethics committee.

 

...arrrgghh, to many things going through my head,

 

hey you, stop reading, and start thinking

 

cheers

[RobbieGanjaSeed]

There's lashings of studies done on grass, and don't let them convince you otherwise. The problem is, if it's positive for us, they say more testing needs to be done, and if it has just a slight negative outcome for us, they say that's more than enough for them to be justified. They just keep ignoring the evidence, it really has nothing to do with science anymore, as even DEA judges are aware that grass is harmless compared to many legal substances.

 

I don't think there's any question that grass should be legalised, and I don't believe we should need to justify it in any way. It's simply ridiculous to believe we're in a democratic society when the majority are ignored. In america, where marijuana law reform is on a balot, it is voted for in favor time and again. But each time it's just beaten down in political debate. No rulers of countries in time gone by, no matter how fierce they were, controlled what a person could injest. As far as I'm aware, this sort of political moral legislation is a relatively new thing, and is abomnible to a society that considers itself both free, and enlightened.

 

Hell, one of the biggest problems we face is the idiocy of the situation. Why do we have to provide evidence and fight for the right to smoke grass, when there is absolutely no good reason for it to be banned in the first place? It should be the onus upon them to prove it's danger, not ours to prove it's not. I don't know of any other issue in the world were something popular is banned, and the peope are forced to give cause why it shouldn't have. it's absolutely backwards.

 

It's painfull to go over the same evidence time and again, but we all know the reasons that hemp, and there-fore grass also was banned now anyway. Politics and not public safety is all it ever involved. Not just smoking gear, but hemp too should be left alone, as freely as any god given plant. I voted for these clowns to balance the national budget, and other such tasks, but I nor most people, ever vote for a party or man to legislate our morals, or social behaviour.

 

I doubt that legalising grass would increase use, at any age level, or create a society of lazy people. To believe so is to believe the propaganda that smokers can't manage their lives, legal or otherwise. I believe studies done in South Australia when things were cool down there showed no significant increase of smokers. Statistics of people that admitted to smoking grass did increase, but how many people now will answer a telephone poll on the subject while they're eating dinner, and admit to being a regular user? Who knows what clown is on the other end. So when the stats were taken after the law was changed, there were obviously more people prepared to admit their use than before.

 

Even so, the amount of smokers, and hard drug users in Holland per head of population is incredibly much lower than it is in the USA, the country with the most serious consequnces for using grass in the western world. The united States has more of their own citizens in jail than any country in the world, not just now, but ever before. Just the other day, the prison population of the united states of america surpassed the prison population of russia under Stalin, and China under Mao combined. An overwhelming number of these are drug offenders. Holland on the other hand has one of the lowest rates of addiction, drug death, and incarcertion in the world. Holland is also a productive country in a progressive part of the world, and shows no sign of being a country suffering from it's population being stoned silly.

 

The police are in fact the enforcers of the law, and not the legislators. The politicians are the people we need to target. the only differnece here is of course Queensland, were the Police Union has a very active role in legislation, and particularly so in the drug arena. The problem with cops isn't that they can change the law or not, but that they are so keen to enforce the laws that makes them unpopular. Sure there are those that are different, but by and large, the cops are happy as pigs in crap to have the laws the way they are, and many would love to see more stringent laws than we have.

 

In Queensland, a couple years back, the police won the right to trade in drugs without a court's consent. Previously, and in other states, a cop needs to have permission from the boss cops, and a judge or magistrate before they can buy or sell drugs. But in the desire to arrest more people, they petitioned the gov. to allow them more room to operate, and less red tape so they could in their words "catch the big fish".

 

The law allows a cop to use, buy or sell without need for permission, so they can more easily slip into the ranks of drug users, and look the part, so the story goes.

 

I was doing a Justice department course at the time of this law being implemented, and I sat through a lecture on the issue, presented by some detective. I asked what quantities did this allow the cop to trade up to without written consent. I was told he couldn't answer that for security reasons. So we as public aren't even allowed to know the law, what kind of crap is that?

 

I asked why should a cop be allowed to use the drugs without consent. I was told it was so the cop could use drugs at a deal, so he looked the part.

 

I asked if this was to catch kids with foils, or to catch mega dealers. Mega dealers of course. I proceeded to let the detective know that in my opinion, it has to be to catch small time users. that if a guy was to turn up to a mega deal stoned off his tities, he'd likely get his head shot off for being such a wanker. Or at least, they would loose respect, and would be concerned about his conduct. remeber, this law is supposed to be to get in good with mega trafficers. And covers any drug. Imagine trying to count loads of cash while smashed on something serious? Imagine a business man type drug deal (as they say they're trying to smash), having a player arriving like that? He'd be considered a serious security risk.

 

Obvious, the law was made so that cops could share a joint, wherever they are, to catch you and I. So that they could act like one of the boys, and whip the cuffs out when the gear is produced.

 

This is why the cops get hated. They dreamt this law up, and pressured the gov. to allow it. And they know the real score. They're as guilty in most cases, as the politicians in my opinion.

 

One last thing, the American gov. is in fact applying pressure to the dutch . They've made available large sums of money for anti-marijuana lobbyists to stir up trouble. As far as I'm aware, they are in fact doing this, and it is at the hands of the yanks.

 

cheers

rob

[Tom]

Great to see your post length getting back to normal Robbie, as always a good and relevant post to read.

 

http://www.gamers-forums.com/smilies/contrib/ruinkai/coolgleamA.gif

[white_cluster]

The cops dont wanna bust us guys, I have been caught twice for growing pot, but the last 2 times the cops we're in my house they had to take the bongs and stuff visible in the entry but they avoided raiding me, They knew 100% that I was a personal grower.

Once they were there cos neighbours rung when people were trying to break in to get me, they took 2 ounces and the bongs, took us back to the station, but never bothered with a warrant even though it was stinky in there and I had been manicuring that day and the smell was rank.

 

For me pot is pretty much legal, the only thing that stops it being legal is my neighbours, and I grow indoors so its no worry of mine. If the neighbours call, the cops will have to waste their time and drive all the way out here.

 

I can grow as much as I want/need indoors, I live in a part of the world where I can smoke joints in public usually. I sit around my backyrad smoking pot all day and no-one can really do anything about it. There is a tiny bit of paranoia that I could get busted one day, but I doubt it, even though the pigs have records saying that I grow, I feel safe enough.

 

If everybody that smoked had there own personal garden, the laws would fizzle away, even if pot wasn't legalised, charges wouldn't be made. While you buy off a dealer we have no hope of that.

 

Pot and Money need to be seperated far apart, they are two opposites.

 

Buying pot is like powerwalking to Mcdonalds eating a big mac and powerwalking home again.

[RobbieGanjaSeed]

Gee, I wish I lived where you are. I live in Qld however, and as I said, recently did a justice department diploma. It's run by cops basically. Most of the tutors are detecives. I did the course to enhance my knowledge of what they (cops) can do and what they can't do to citizens (particularly youth), as i'm involved with youth services. The course is to pre train people for many of the justice department services, and trainee cops are pretty well forced to go through the course too.

 

Frequently through the course, the cops doing the lecture, and the cops sitting int the lecture, getting degreees in their trade, refer to us drug users as immoral, deviant, useless and a whole long list of other not so nice names. Whenever a part of the course required group answering to questions, and if the subject was drugs, as it so often was, the answer to the drug problem was always seen as teaching us users morals. Always answers included harsher penalties, and more pro-active styles in policing. Although as many as half the course were only training cops, these guys were the ones already selected by phsycological evaluation in many case, and there-fore just the people they are looking for. Others in the course were prison gaurds, customs officers, and active police, doing updated training.

 

Although I was nervous at first, eventually cleaning my house right out, I had a great opportunity to present the truth to these lectures, when I was faced with the inevitable oral presentations on these matters. I was as popular as a pork chop in a synagoge.

 

Often some extreme suggestions by others were as unbelievable as to take the children away from users, to break the cycle. Drugs were always seen as the probable reason why a person committed some act of indecency like child molestation, or rape. Never did the course instructor (a detecive) say otherwise, and on a few times, even made the suggestion themselves.

 

Interestingly, when I was a kid, I worked in the records department of police headquarters in Qld as a public servant. I read a lot of child molestation files, and rape files, and overwhelmingly, they were comited by drunks.

 

I also have to do the occasional legal aid course to understand the new stradegies being implemented against youth by police, especially on the issue of drugs. This gives me opportunity to speak with other people in the same arena as I, but in different districts. As well as the legal aid's officers running the courses. I also visit kids (young adults) in prison, and help them to get defense, or arrange a person to sit in interviews with them when arrested if just adult age or under. I also attend the courts with them when they're being tried, or more accuratly; proccessed. I'm involved with up to 25 year olds.

 

There's certainly no suggestion that any of the cops I've been involved with show any signs to drug users except hatred. Not so much lately because of my health, but at least weekly I was involved in some kind of police altercation, so I've seen quiet a bit of police action here.

 

I've also been the subject of many searches and raides myself, and none of them were pretty. Although nothing was ever found (goodness help me these days), they tore the place apart, and left the place like a bomb had gone off. Even saw a cop tear a very old collectable teddy bear open that belonged to a friend, to see if drugs were inside. Although it's been years since I was put through that kind of crap, the kids I am involved with these days go through the same thing. This a good reason, although expensive, why many people buy only small quantities from macdonalds.

 

I lived in Brunswick heads for a long time, and the bust situation was different there, although that's changed too now. We used to smoke in the pubs in Bruns, and Mullum, and just about everywhere else. When the cops "busted" my neighbor for his grow, they called on the phone to arrange a time to do a search. He put his plants under my lights for the day, and then had them around. Didn't bother to clean the grow equipment away but. All was fine for him.

 

However, I'm told things are nothing like that anymore there.

 

I am aware that many high profile ex cops, and some active ones, are involved with the drug law reform debate on our side. But these guys by their own admission usually have to wait until they leave the force before they air their views, so they don't face troubles with the majority. I have a great documentary here I taped from the cutting edge that has a few cops, mainly yanks, that are exactly as I said. The ex head of Scotalnd Yard is on our side, and if my memory serves me well, even wished ozstoner well when starting this site.

 

I guess these things are different from state to state, although pardoning Tasmania (even then only because of the budget I imagine) all the states arbitrarily spend volumes of tax dollars on arial searches (WA?), even if the people next door are quiet nice.

 

Sometimes, a local situation is different from the state's noraml stand. Such as Nth. NSW is to NSW. When I lived there, NSW was a tough on drug stand, however, the local scene was different. Often this is only because the local cops, or head cop is a smoker too. When I was in records (Qld), they watched how many busts a cop made, compared to the state average. If the local Sgt. has a significantly less amount of busts to what was expected, they were transfered, and watched there for a while. Maybe this is the case where you are WC? If so, enjoy it while ya can. Where are you?

 

cheers

rob

Edited July 27, 2003 by RobbieGanjaSeed