Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | ... | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | ... | 45

gzt

9576 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1397


  Reply # 1527697 7-Apr-2016 14:22
Send private message

Rikkitic:

Kiwifruta:

So if cannabis were legal would gangs turn to more serious crime to generate income?
We've already mentioned a few, I'd prefer the gangs sold dope than the more serious alternatives.


This is actually a good point but I have always wondered, and still do, why gangs are given so much credibility and respect by authorities here at all. On occasions when they do the responsible thing, as with the carload of gang members that was pushed over a cliff, mayors and police officials fall over themselves expressing praise and gratitude. Why? Gangs are a cancer. They shouldn't be tolerated at all, let alone thanked when they happen to do the right thing. They should be stomped on, eradicated, and driven out of existence. They are not mighty warriors reliving the good old days. They are mostly overweight, out of condition, tobacco smoking heavy drinking drug taking bullies that clump together and intimidate others through violent aggression and force of numbers. They are thugs and criminals and have no place in society.


They are already into the more serious alternatives. There are now probably more houses in this country contaminated with meth than not. Gangs need to be deprived of all their sources of income, starting with drugs of all kinds and moving onto every other thing they stick their evil fingers into. They need to be pursued and hounded until they are driven out of existence. There is no place for gangs in a civilised society. Clubs, yes, organised activities to keep kids occupied and engaged, yes, other worthy endeavours, yes, but not gangs in their current form or anything like it.



Well ok most 'organised' crime in NZ is actually at subsistence level. Ie; Bush to tinny house with everyone in between getting paid in various degrees and not a huge amount left over. You could if you wanted break up a 'gang' but you would have exactly the same problems on the street.

Various 'gang' leaders have actually backed off meth and tried to keep people steered away from it. In the context of the challenges some deserve a more than a poke in the eye. The world may not be as simple as you think it is.



6802 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3180

Subscriber

  Reply # 1527712 7-Apr-2016 14:56
Send private message

I'm sure it isn't. If gangs want to become social clubs that's fine with me. But they still shouldn't be tolerated in their present form.

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


 
 
 
 


Try Wrike: fast, easy, and efficient project collaboration software

gzt

9576 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1397


  Reply # 1527725 7-Apr-2016 15:27
One person supports this post
Send private message

MikeAqua: The penalties are higher for meth (Class A) but as per an earlier post its concentrated and a trained monkey could make it so that is what crims make and sell and therefore what people buy.

Except that it now requires an international crime partner to obtain the precursor chemicals. Yay. Another spectacular win for prohibition style philosophy increasing organised crime.

2244 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1066


  Reply # 1527767 7-Apr-2016 16:23
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

Kiwifruta:

So if cannabis were legal would gangs turn to more serious crime to generate income?
We've already mentioned a few, I'd prefer the gangs sold dope than the more serious alternatives.

 

Gangs are a cancer. They shouldn't be tolerated at all, let alone thanked when they happen to do the right thing. They should be stomped on, eradicated, and driven out of existence. They are not mighty warriors reliving the good old days. They are mostly overweight, out of condition, tobacco smoking heavy drinking drug taking bullies that clump together and intimidate others through violent aggression and force of numbers. They are thugs and criminals and have no place in society.

 

They are already into the more serious alternatives. There are now probably more houses in this country contaminated with meth than not. Gangs need to be deprived of all their sources of income, starting with drugs of all kinds and moving onto every other thing they stick their evil fingers into. They need to be pursued and hounded until they are driven out of existence. There is no place for gangs in a civilised society. Clubs, yes, organised activities to keep kids occupied and engaged, yes, other worthy endeavours, yes, but not gangs in their current form or anything like it.

 

 

If gangs *are* a cancer, then it's a cancer that feeds off the exact kinds of things that you're advocating. They provide a place for the marginalised and the people who society doen't treat well to congregate. The more you target them, the more you will be targetting gang associates and non-members whose lifestyle resembles a gang.

 

As for gangs moving to other crimes... they would be doing those things if they could. Or, at least, (I assume) it's easier to make money from cannabis than selling heroin, so gangs sell cannabis mostly, with a few outliers in the heroin business. Making cannabis legal would make life more difficult for gangs... they would have to move into riskier, less well-paying businesses. It's simple economics.

 

 

 

And don't get me started on the "contaminated meth houses" racket... a problem requiring a bit of decent cleaning has been blown up into a mountain of expensive house reconstructions by the meth cleanup industry, the Police, and the Govt.

 

 


gzt

9576 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1397


  Reply # 1528083 8-Apr-2016 00:56
Send private message

The meth issue in particular should have been and should be seen as a public health issue and action taken in line with addressing other health issues. Expecting the police to sort it out by themselves is probably similar to expecting them to sort out venereal disease or something.

gzt

9576 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1397


  Reply # 1528085 8-Apr-2016 01:02
Send private message

frankv: And don't get me started on the "contaminated meth houses" racket... a problem requiring a bit of decent cleaning has been blown up into a mountain of expensive house reconstructions by the meth cleanup industry, the Police, and the Govt.

I have not heard this perspective before. I guess there are two issues in there:
a) users who are smoking meth indoors residue
b) meth manufacturing residue
What is the story on those?


81 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 17


  Reply # 1529735 10-Apr-2016 23:43
6 people support this post
Send private message

I get this topic is fizzling off but I read through all of it and there are a number of things completely missed by both sides.

 

 

 

First question, Why do people start taking drugs in the first place?

 

Simple, they see it as a way out of their current struggles.they see it as a method if removing pain from their life, it fills a hole in their life that is holding them back. How is MDMA any different from legal drugs like Fluoxetine? A common anti depressant, both target the same receptors, one causes an increase in serotonin, the other reduces the amount needed to be happy. Yea we get drugs are dangerous, Heroin and many other drugs have ruined lives, but I know from personal experience it has saved lives too. Some drugs like Meth, P and Heroin we should try to remove from society but criminalizing users, putting them into a situation that strains their mind further, ie, prison doesn't fight the issue, it pushes people further down the rabbit hole that support and an environment that allows them to continue their habit on their own terms helps people break bad habits. We know sugar is addictive. We also know that when we are unhealthily fat and friends and family call us out for it, it doesn't kick us into improving our situation, it makes our situation worse.

 

The ultimate goal is to curve drug abuse. If a drug is found to be safe for public consumption then any argument against its legality goes against logic. If a drug is bad for you and people are addicted, would it not be better to wean people off it, offering alternative drugs with a lesser impact on themselves and moving them towards a drug free or at least a reduced drug dependency life seems like the better thing to do. When a bull comes running out of the gate, all you have is a bow and a few arrows, do you try to take the bull out as fast as you can or do you dodge, keep it moving until it tires itself out and then deal with it in a calmer state? The drug issues in New Zealand is far from managed. If you spend any time in Hamilton, you know that the mongrel mob holds a strong control on the city. They might not be in the news often but the killer bees are increasing their presence in Auckland. I want to see the power of gangs reduced as much as the next guy and decriminalizing drugs will severely impact the income for these gangs.

 

Another thing people completely missed in this thread is the impact of prescription drugs and even over the counter drugs. there is a far greater problem of prescription drugs being abused. I have personal experience with this because I have an addiction issue with opioid based prescription painkillers. These are legal drugs that you can get from your doctor, and there are plenty of doctors that will hand over prescriptions like they're nothing that produce highs much like heroin. People would argue that this is a reason to not legalize drugs but in my eyes it is quite the opposite. Being addicted to a legal drug allows me to talk to my doctor about how I can manage my addiction and reduce it. Those who are addicted to Meth, P, Heroin do not have that option. they're too scared of being imprisoned for their problem rather than helped.

 

There is this notion that drug addicts are people who do not contribute to society, do not have any life goals, only care for their next high and will break the law to get money to pay for their addiction. In which yes, there are people like that but in reality, most people with addiction issues, whether its weed, tobacco, alcohol, prescription pain killer, hallucinogenics, opioids, speed or anything else just want to be helped and included with society. very few people like being excluded from society. it is one of the worst punishments you can do to a man is to banish them from society and that is what the current war on drugs is doing. People with drug issues are not given the support needed to bring themselves out of their situation. They are looked down upon and no matter how easy it might seem to you personally "Its all in your head", To people who actually suffer from chronic depression and do not personally have the will power to get up in the morning, find it much easier to pop a pill to get through their day when there is no one to help them.

 

I say it is time to lax the laws on drugs and move towards a progressive society that helps people get better, not punishes them for falling down. I may have a drug problem, But I have a family that supports me, I have friends who support me, I am at university studying what I love and getting top marks, I have a job, I have a drug problem, but I am moving forward with my life after a sever low point. All people need when it comes to drug problems is the support to move forward. yes legalizing drugs will lead to other trying things they would otherwise not do, yes not everyone will get better, no matter how much effort and support you give them but reworking the laws so people who have fallen are helped back up rather than abandoned is a much better thing to do.

 

And no I do not support the use of hard drugs, But in my eyes laws wont stop those who want drugs from taking them, but the correct laws will help them get back on track because the current system just leaves people to fail, once they have fallen.


235 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 7


  Reply # 1529785 11-Apr-2016 07:18
Send private message

Nicely put Rudster, well done.




6802 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3180

Subscriber

  Reply # 1529805 11-Apr-2016 08:30
Send private message

+1 just for reading through all the posts here. Another +1 for your brave and thoughtful comments. A lot of people, including me, agree with you. Now for the politicians.

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


gzt

9576 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1397


  Reply # 1530023 11-Apr-2016 12:31
Send private message

+1 that was worth reading.

11615 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1992

Trusted

  Reply # 1530028 11-Apr-2016 12:43
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

+1 just for reading through all the posts here. Another +1 for your brave and thoughtful comments. A lot of people, including me, agree with you. Now for the politicians.

 

 

 

 

 

 

There you go again, anyone who doesnt agree, is labelled


BDFL - Memuneh
59991 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 11092

Administrator
Trusted
Geekzone
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1530036 11-Apr-2016 13:03
4 people support this post
Send private message

tdgeek:

 

Rikkitic:

 

+1 just for reading through all the posts here. Another +1 for your brave and thoughtful comments. A lot of people, including me, agree with you. Now for the politicians.

 

 

There you go again, anyone who doesnt agree, is labelled

 

 

I see it differently - you are stretching it now. "Now for the politicians" is not targeting people who doesn't agree, but the actual people who vote laws - you know, POLITICIANS.

 

 





16502 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4597

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1530039 11-Apr-2016 13:10
Send private message

freitasm:

 

tdgeek:

 

Rikkitic:

 

+1 just for reading through all the posts here. Another +1 for your brave and thoughtful comments. A lot of people, including me, agree with you. Now for the politicians.

 

 

There you go again, anyone who doesnt agree, is labelled

 

 

I see it differently - you are stretching it now. "Now for the politicians" is not targeting people who doesn't agree, but the actual people who vote laws - you know, POLITICIANS.

 

 

 

\

 

 

 

Right, but those politicians are voted in by their constituents, based on the policies they offer at the time of electioneering. If a politician is strongly in favour of a particular stance on drugs, I may or not vote for them depending on what else they are offering in terms of views.

 

In theory, if the system is working properly, the people in parliament should be doing what the majority of people who voted for them, want.

 

 

 

 


11615 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1992

Trusted

  Reply # 1530048 11-Apr-2016 13:12
Send private message

freitasm:

 

tdgeek:

 

Rikkitic:

 

+1 just for reading through all the posts here. Another +1 for your brave and thoughtful comments. A lot of people, including me, agree with you. Now for the politicians.

 

 

There you go again, anyone who doesnt agree, is labelled

 

 

I see it differently - you are stretching it now. "Now for the politicians" is not targeting people who doesn't agree, but the actual people who vote laws - you know, POLITICIANS.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ah yep, if that was the case I agree, but from real time experience, these labels are targeted at those that disagree. But your right it may have meant the actual politicians

 

Where I took my impression from, was that I've often seen other high commendations to those that agree. That took my mindset to what I'm used to reading

 

My apologies to the poster if she meant Govt politicians




6802 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3180

Subscriber

  Reply # 1530074 11-Apr-2016 14:14
Send private message

Wow. My posts must be having some good effect if they are arousing so much passion in my critics. For the record, yes, I did mean politicians, as in those who sit in Parliament. As has been pointed out, they are elected to represent us and part of that process is our right and duty to lobby them about the issues we find important. Democracy is not casting your vote and going away for three years to let them get on with it. Democracy is about monitoring your representatives, informing them, and expressing your disagreement when you don’t like the direction they are going in. That is why we have select committees, amongst other things.

 

I withdrew from the firm captain thread because I didn’t want to inflame things further but I do think there is an effort underway to silence me and I think those engaged in it are guilty of precisely the things they accuse me of. They are trying to undermine my arguments and intimidate me by sticking labels on me and by accusing me of things like trolling. That is merely a tactic. It has no substance. In any case, a troll is one who makes outrageous statements purely to evoke a response. As it happens, I believe in the opinions I express. Some of them, such as those relating to drug decriminalisation and copyright, I believe in strongly and I am prepared to defend them strongly. Because those who disagree with me cannot produce better arguments, they are now resorting to the labelling they accuse me of. But calling me a troll is tantamount to questioning my sincerity, and I find that unfortunate. I can assure everyone that I am utterly sincere.

 

This will be my last statement on this subject unless I am forced to respond to other unfounded accusations.

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


1 | ... | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | ... | 45
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





News »

Amazon launches the International Shopping Experience in the Amazon Shopping App
Posted 19-Apr-2018 08:38


Spark New Zealand and TVNZ to bring coverage of Rugby World Cup 2019
Posted 16-Apr-2018 06:55


How Google can seize Microsoft Office crown
Posted 14-Apr-2018 11:08


How back office transformation drives IRD efficiency
Posted 12-Apr-2018 21:15


iPod laws in a smartphone world: will we ever get copyright right?
Posted 12-Apr-2018 21:13


Lightbox service using big data and analytics to learn more about customers
Posted 9-Apr-2018 12:11


111 mobile caller location extended to iOS
Posted 6-Apr-2018 13:50


Huawei announces the HUAWEI P20 series
Posted 29-Mar-2018 11:41


Symantec Internet Security Threat Report shows increased endpoint technology risks
Posted 26-Mar-2018 18:29


Spark switches on long-range IoT network across New Zealand
Posted 26-Mar-2018 18:22


Stuff Pix enters streaming video market
Posted 21-Mar-2018 09:18


Windows no longer Microsoft’s main focus
Posted 13-Mar-2018 07:47


Why phone makers are obsessed with cameras
Posted 11-Mar-2018 12:25


New Zealand Adopts International Open Data Charter
Posted 3-Mar-2018 12:48


Shipments tumble as NZ phone upgrades slow
Posted 2-Mar-2018 11:48



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.