Misleading information and deceptive conduct

[MrNiceGuy]

G'Day to all the Aussie stoners out there.

 

I'm new to the forum but not new to the cannabis scene. What i would like to discuss and get opinions of others out there is on the thought and whether it is possible for 'us' the public of Australia to take the Australian Government to court over misleading information and deceptive conduct in relation to the schedualing of cannabis and the laws that sourround it making it illegal for one to process and consume. Being a university student i have been talking to my trusty friends whom are coming close to the end of there legal degrees and they seem to think that 'we the people' have a case against the government. Just as an indiviual would sue a travel company for misleading about a holiday package or lead customers on through deceptive conduct, we need to get together and make it happen so we can sue the government for leading everyone on about the harm of cannabis, where there is ample scientific evidence coming out of the USA supporting cannabis as a safe medicinal treatment, industrially it is safe and from a recreational perspective it is safe (much safer than alcohol and tobacco).

 

So any thoughts people?

[wilderbud]

dont think so - we would just be fining ourselves in the end

[Delta 9]

Don't vote at the next election. That sends a bigger message. And if you're worried about copping a fine for not voting, do you know anyone that has been?

[Frazz]

for every study, review, opinion you can present that Cannabis is not harmful (incidentally smoking Cannabis proly is harmful)

 

the Govt. can counter with studies, reviews, opinions that it is in fact harmful

 

so stalemate ensures

 

Cannabis prohibition is bound by a Charter signed up to by Aust. and many many other countries and formulated by UN that explicitly Prohibits Cannabis and schedules it along with Narcotic Substances

 

ppl have been trying for 50 years to challenge and / or overthrow Prohibition laws but have never come near changing the status quo

 

furthermore Aust. Govt. has National Cannabis Prevention and Information Centre whose sole job is to prevent the use of Cannabis

 

just ask that fat slug Professor jan copeland (NCPIC) ... professor .. yea right, and im the lead singer of the Doors!

 

[Auntynorm]

G'day Frazz.

 

And I'm Elvis, or was that Janis ,or Jimi? I get too stoned and keep forgetting. Let's see your trusty friends with almost legal degrees, stand up and get the ball rolling, Mr Nice Guy. I'll bet you London to a brick, you will NOT find one, not one. They are going to be LAWYERS. The scum of the earth, they are POLITICIANS in training. And they ARE NOT going to fuck up their gravy train, not for anyone or anything. They will quite happily fuck up yours, matter of fact they enjoy doing just that.

 

No guitars here.

[merl1n]

Hi there Mr Niceguy,

You would have more luck (none) suing the church for false and misleading info about the existance of a god, as the gov't for drug info

And I'd have to agree with Norm about your 'almost lawyer' mates taking it on. Its a bit like Dr's they know cannabis is there and they have seen its benefits but won't/ can't endorse its use. I've seen more Drs, specialists etc than I can count on my fingers and toes. All know I smoke but none will formally condone the use of an illegal substance. The AMA would probably strike them off if they did so publicly. Same with lawyers.

Yes cannabis is safer than alcohol and tobacco but look at the amount of money in alcohol and tobacco, both in taxes and employment. The Gov't aren't going to give up that cash cow in a hurry. Also as Frazz stated the Aust gov't have signed up to the charter years ago so to now remove cannabis, it ain't gonna happen unless the US Federal Gov't change policy IMO

 

I love the line that lawyers are politicians in training, Norm.

[Reverend]

It is admirable in what you are trying to do but as all of the gents above have pointed out it will be a no show.

Have you asked the future lawyers to sign a petition so that it can be presented to the powers that be?

 

If they do please let us know how many.

 

[MongyMan]

Don't vote at the next election. That sends a bigger message.

 

What message does that send?

[Delta 9]

What message does that send?

 

That the public don't have confidence in their government. Either side.

[Frank Reynolds]

Should be a 'non of the above' choice, see how that one goes =D