Marijuana legalization in New Zealand

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › Marijuana legalization in New Zealand

1 | ... | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16

Networkn
32876 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15477

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3004365 1-Dec-2022 22:11

Rikkitic:

I'm not sure what is even being discussed here. Are we (whoever is watching) having an argument or discussion or disagreement about something? My statement about the referendum, which was made back in July, suddenly seems to have become a hot item. Not sure why people are responding to it now. Also not sure why it seems to be seen as an argument against democracy. I accept the result. I accepted it then. I disagree with it, as a citizen of a democracy is entitled to do. My disagreement is with the result, not the process. I do believe many people who voted against legalisation did so out of fear and ignorance, though of course not everyone will have. The process was fair and democratic and the result, though unfortunate, properly arrived at. I don't question that and I have no problem with it. I look forward to the issue being revisited and a different decision arrived at, also via a fair and democratic process.

I think the issue is :

"Voters made a dumb decision based on fear and ignorance. Get over it."

One word would have changed everything. 'Some'.

You have no evidence to support the claim that all or most did.

networkn

Networkn
32876 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15477

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3004368 1-Dec-2022 22:16

elpenguino:

So, what were your reasons?

Nice try. I made my feelings on the matter clear at the time, and I am uninterested in discussing them again till the matter comes up for decision-making next time. Very very briefly, I had less issue with the concept and more with the legislation and it's wording and the lack of detail around it's implementation.

elpenguino

3578 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2941

#3004371 1-Dec-2022 22:25

networkn:

elpenguino:

So, what were your reasons?

Nice try. I made my feelings on the matter clear at the time, and I am uninterested in discussing them again till the matter comes up for decision-making next time. Very very briefly, I had less issue with the concept and more with the legislation and it's wording and the lack of detail around it's implementation.

What are you inferring with 'nice try'?

You could have voted in favour and any problems would have been cleaned up with an amendment.

Legislation is seldom perfect first time round. Still, keeps the house busy.

Most of the posters in this thread are just like chimpanzees on MDMA, full of feelings of bonhomie, joy, and optimism. Fred99 8/4/21

networkn

Networkn
32876 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15477

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3004372 1-Dec-2022 22:30

elpenguino:

What are you inferring with 'nice try'?

You could have voted in favour and any problems would have been cleaned up with an amendment.

Legislation is seldom perfect first time round. Still, keeps the house busy.

You clearly have more faith in the Governments ability to 'clean up' the legislation than I do. The evidence overwhelmingly shows they wouldn't likely get it right for a long time.

elpenguino

3578 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2941

#3004378 1-Dec-2022 22:40

networkn:

elpenguino:

What are you inferring with 'nice try'?

You could have voted in favour and any problems would have been cleaned up with an amendment.

Legislation is seldom perfect first time round. Still, keeps the house busy.

You clearly have more faith in the Governments ability to 'clean up' the legislation than I do. The evidence overwhelmingly shows they wouldn't likely get it right for a long time.

I wouldnt say faith, more awareness. I listen to the political reporting on RNZ sometimes and such things are the bread and butter of activities in the house.

Most of the posters in this thread are just like chimpanzees on MDMA, full of feelings of bonhomie, joy, and optimism. Fred99 8/4/21

networkn

Networkn
32876 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15477

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3004380 1-Dec-2022 22:58

elpenguino:

I wouldnt say faith, more awareness. I listen to the political reporting on RNZ sometimes and such things are the bread and butter of activities in the house.

Same. Having said that, often I feel that the subsequent changes aren't an improvement, but rather a step backward.

I would have wholeheartedly supported decriminalization as a first step, and in my view, that would have gotten public approval pretty easily (though no-one gets busted and sent to prison for smoking a joint at a BBQ any more).

Apple TV

Stream your favourite shows now on Apple TV (affiliate link).

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19075 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16324

Lifetime subscriber

#3004410 2-Dec-2022 07:24

networkn:

... though no-one gets busted and sent to prison for smoking a joint at a BBQ any more).

I would have thought that as well, but according to Guyon Espiner (see 'Wasted') that is not in fact the case. People are still being jailed here for simple possession.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19075 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16324

Lifetime subscriber

#3004426 2-Dec-2022 08:03

This article on RNZ caught my attention. It is one of several follow-ups to the Wasted documentary. The reason it caught my attention is this: 'We're not fighting a war on drugs, Customs intelligence chief Bruce Berry says, we're fighting the drug economy.

"The money is the driver. The supply is fed by the desire to make money and there is a demand for the product," he says in the new RNZ documentary Guyon Espiner: Wasted. "While there's demand, you will never beat the economy."'

The money is the driver. Kiwis pay the third highest price in the world for meth. Why is meth so expensive here? Because so much is intercepted and the penalties for importing it are so high. This cost has to be covered. So stop trying to poke a hole in water. Where is the logic in enforcement when it just makes the drug more profitable? Legalise it, regulate it, take the money out of it and it will go elsewhere. Is it really not time to stop doing the same thing over and over that doesn't work?

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

networkn

Networkn
32876 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15477

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3004428 2-Dec-2022 08:07

Rikkitic:

networkn:

... though no-one gets busted and sent to prison for smoking a joint at a BBQ any more).

I would have thought that as well, but according to Guyon Espiner (see 'Wasted') that is not in fact the case. People are still being jailed here for simple possession.

On what period of reporting and what report is his basing his claim (and when)? It would go against the claims by the police that they are no longer policing simple possession of weed. If it's not that simple, ie also carrying meth, or with priors, on parole then that's something a bit different.

Guy was the interviewer yesterday between Swarbrick and Goldsmith and when Goldsmith made the claim that people smoking a joint at a BBQ aren't going to prison etc, Guy didn't disagree, and neither did Chloe.

networkn

Networkn
32876 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15477

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3004620 2-Dec-2022 12:15

Rikkitic:

This article on RNZ caught my attention. It is one of several follow-ups to the Wasted documentary. The reason it caught my attention is this: 'We're not fighting a war on drugs, Customs intelligence chief Bruce Berry says, we're fighting the drug economy.

"The money is the driver. The supply is fed by the desire to make money and there is a demand for the product," he says in the new RNZ documentary Guyon Espiner: Wasted. "While there's demand, you will never beat the economy."'

The money is the driver. Kiwis pay the third highest price in the world for meth. Why is meth so expensive here? Because so much is intercepted and the penalties for importing it are so high. This cost has to be covered. So stop trying to poke a hole in water. Where is the logic in enforcement when it just makes the drug more profitable? Legalise it, regulate it, take the money out of it and it will go elsewhere. Is it really not time to stop doing the same thing over and over that doesn't work?

You are now introducing meth into the picture, legalization of meth wasn't in the referendum.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19075 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16324

Lifetime subscriber

#3004678 2-Dec-2022 14:39

networkn:

You are now introducing meth into the picture, legalization of meth wasn't in the referendum.

My point is the whole prohibition mentality is wrong. Whether is it meth or pot or booze or something else, the more it is banned, the more money that can be made from it. Practically everyone, including cops, politicians (some, at least), various experts and the people in that documentary, all agree that the war on drugs is lost. It has failed. It doesn’t work and never will. Yet we continue to impose severe penalties for use and sale of meth. That doesn’t stop people from using it. The only thing it does is push the price (and profit!) up because of the added risk to the seller. Those who get caught have a bad time. Those who don’t live it up and keep feeding the habits of addicts. The only way out of this is to take the money out of it, and the way to do that is just to swallow some pride, put on some big boy pants, admit the billions spent on repression were a complete waste of resources, and just legalise the damned stuff. Portugal has shown it can be done, so we don’t even have to be brave about it. We just have to pull our heads out of our arses.

Meth is clearly a dangerous drug that makes people do crazy things. It is much worse than most other illegal substances. So it needs to be carefully regulated and legalised in a highly controlled manner aimed at ultimately getting people off it without alienating them. I believe this is possible. I also believe truly hopeless addicts can be allowed to continue feeding their habit without creating unacceptable social issues if the right resources are in place.

And I believe there is not a chance in hell that anything like this will ever happen in New Zealand. There are just too many people clinging to the old ways here.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Mighty Ape

Shop now at Mighty Ape (affiliate link).

ezbee

2659 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3105

#3004690 2-Dec-2022 14:58

Meth is pretty terrible highly addictive drug.
Never mind the long term damage psychologically.
There are newer ones that are worse, but that does not make Meth good.

Should we give up on seatbelt, speed limit, WOF laws because we can't assure 100% they will be followed ? Drink driving ?

I'm reminded of the terrible experiment with 'legal highs'.
Queues outside the shop in the morning and people saying well its legal so it must be safe.
School children buying it on the way to school, or getting a 'friend' to do so for them.
Friend thing was hardly ever needed in my area as enforcement was pretty absent.

The BS claims about inventing designer drugs with no addictive qualities or dangers.
Results were quite the opposite, and seeemd to get worse over time.
Where were regulators monitoring this ?

It was a terrible experiment that ruined lives.
It has also probably poisoned any effort to legalize marijuana.

Given the complete and utter fail to enforce and assure regulation of legal highs,
why would anyone believe all the claims of safe regulated industry for other drugs.

I think we might have got marijuana over the line but for legal highs.

There are many exaggerated claims about medicinal properties.
One shudders at what a good marketer will do to grow the market.
Its legal, natural, we can advertise any way we want.
Promising elements are not the ones that make you high though.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19075 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16324

Lifetime subscriber

#3004698 2-Dec-2022 15:13

ezbee:

Meth is pretty terrible highly addictive drug.
Never mind the long term damage psychologically.
There are newer ones that are worse, but that does not make Meth good.

Should we give up on seatbelt, speed limit, WOF laws because we can't assure 100% they will be followed ? Drink driving ?

I'm reminded of the terrible experiment with 'legal highs'.
Queues outside the shop in the morning and people saying well its legal so it must be safe.
School children buying it on the way to school, or getting a 'friend' to do so for them.
Friend thing was hardly ever needed in my area as enforcement was pretty absent.

The BS claims about inventing designer drugs with no addictive qualities or dangers.
Results were quite the opposite, and seeemd to get worse over time.
Where were regulators monitoring this ?

It was a terrible experiment that ruined lives.
It has also probably poisoned any effort to legalize marijuana.

Given the complete and utter fail to enforce and assure regulation of legal highs,
why would anyone believe all the claims of safe regulated industry for other drugs.

I think we might have got marijuana over the line but for legal highs.

There are many exaggerated claims about medicinal properties.
One shudders at what a good marketer will do to grow the market.
Its legal, natural, we can advertise any way we want.
Promising elements are not the ones that make you high though.

You or others may know more than I do about the legal high issue, but my takeaway at the time was that it was not an 'experiment' as such, more just a massive stuff-up, mainly on the part of Peter Dunne. I would turn your argument around and say if marijuana had been legal at the time, the 'legal high' disaster never would have happened.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19075 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16324

Lifetime subscriber

#3004704 2-Dec-2022 15:19

ezbee: Should we give up on seatbelt, speed limit, WOF laws because we can't assure 100% they will be followed ? Drink driving ?

This is a fake equivalence that doesn't make any sense. There is a lot of money in illegal drugs, which is why they can't be stopped and what my post was about. This doesn't apply in any way to traffic measures like seatbelts, speed, WOF, or drink driving. Your argument has no point.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

itxtme

2102 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 557

#3004734 2-Dec-2022 16:07

ezbee:

I'm reminded of the terrible experiment with 'legal highs'.
Queues outside the shop in the morning and people saying well its legal so it must be safe.
School children buying it on the way to school, or getting a 'friend' to do so for them.
Friend thing was hardly ever needed in my area as enforcement was pretty absent.

The BS claims about inventing designer drugs with no addictive qualities or dangers.
Results were quite the opposite, and seeemd to get worse over time.
Where were regulators monitoring this ?

It was a terrible experiment that ruined lives.
It has also probably poisoned any effort to legalize marijuana.

Given the complete and utter fail to enforce and assure regulation of legal highs,
why would anyone believe all the claims of safe regulated industry for other drugs.

I think we might have got marijuana over the line but for legal highs.

There are many exaggerated claims about medicinal properties.
One shudders at what a good marketer will do to grow the market.
Its legal, natural, we can advertise any way we want.
Promising elements are not the ones that make you high though.

Everything you have stated is exactly why there should never have been a referendum. The average person lacks the knowledge to take an evidence based look at what is actually the best for reducing harm, social and health. If we had referendums of Prostitution and Same sex marriage I have no doubt they would still be illegal. Save referendums for vanity projects like new flags, not something that requires knowledge of the subject matter.

I think you have a very flawed memory of "legal highs", which were only legal due to their "novel" ingredients which were not banned. The legislation of the time required each one to be banned one by one. The producer changed the chemical slightly and thus it was legal again. Once the law changed and the onus was placed on the importer to prove their safety they all but disappeared, funny that.

The war on drugs is mental, and yet it continues. No wonder there isn't enough resources to chase down ram raiders while your busy jumping in helicopters spraying cannabis plants, or setting up fake breath tests to catch people discussing Euthanasia (I know that last one was old, but it still makes my blood boil).

1 | ... | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16