Nope to dope or toot toot?

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

Forums › Politics › Nope to dope or toot toot?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | ... | 25

Awrrr
18610 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2576418 30-Sep-2020 11:42

networkn:

How many people each year get charged and convicted of possession of cannabis? Police care about possession, they care about supply/distribution/dealers.

Leaving it up to police discretion is a bad idea. It also seems to disproportionately affect Maori. According to the Ministry of Justice, the police arrested and charged 3101 people in 2019/2020 for simple possession or use of cannabis. This figure excludes those arrested for cultivation, supply, possession for supply, dealing, distribution, etc. It is only for personal possession and/or consumption.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Blurtie

463 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2576450 30-Sep-2020 12:56

Wow, that's a lot. Much more than what I was expecting. Of that, 2,535 were convicted/or 'other proved' - just shy of 50 people per week. Think of the wasted resources in charging and convicting these people just for possession/use of cannabis.

I will say though, the general trend does look to be coming down since 2010/2011 - but who's to say that police won't go back to targeting possession/use at some point in the future?

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18610 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2576508 30-Sep-2020 13:26

The other thing is it is known that police will use cannabis possession as a way of getting someone that they can't pin something else on if the individual also happens to have the bad luck of carrying a bit of personal weed. This is an abuse of the law.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

networkn

Networkn
32254 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2576561 30-Sep-2020 15:50

Rikkitic:

The other thing is it is known that police will use cannabis possession as a way of getting someone that they can't pin something else on if the individual also happens to have the bad luck of carrying a bit of personal weed. This is an abuse of the law.

Heh, bad luck? Did they trip and it stuck to them? If you are carrying weed (WHY!?) you *chose* to carry it.

Handle9

11276 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2576563 30-Sep-2020 15:54

networkn:
How many people each year get charged and convicted of possession of cannabis? Police do not care about possession, they care about supply/distribution/dealers.

That's manifestly untrue. The police claim that but it's not how the law is applied, particularly if you are a group they feel like targeting

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18610 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2576600 30-Sep-2020 16:47

networkn:

Heh, bad luck? Did they trip and it stuck to them? If you are carrying weed (WHY!?) you *chose* to carry it.

That is an unnecessarily snarky jibe that just oozes majority culture superiority. Not everyone sees possession of a small amount of weed for their own use as a big deal, or even thinks about it being technically illegal, or thinks it is any business of the police or anyone else.

Maybe a cop sees someone hanging around doing nothing wrong but hopes he can find something to make an easy bust and meet his quota. So he searches the 'suspicious' person and finds enough weed for a single joint. The person, still doing nothing wrong except possessing a little weed, is marched off to jail and a record that will follow her the rest of her life. I suppose you look on with approval as she passes?

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

networkn

Networkn
32254 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2576647 30-Sep-2020 18:08

Rikkitic:

networkn:

Heh, bad luck? Did they trip and it stuck to them? If you are carrying weed (WHY!?) you *chose* to carry it.

That is an unnecessarily snarky jibe that just oozes majority culture superiority. Not everyone sees possession of a small amount of weed for their own use as a big deal, or even thinks about it being technically illegal, or thinks it is any business of the police or anyone else.

Maybe a cop sees someone hanging around doing nothing wrong but hopes he can find something to make an easy bust and meet his quota. So he searches the 'suspicious' person and finds enough weed for a single joint. The person, still doing nothing wrong except possessing a little weed, is marched off to jail and a record that will follow her the rest of her life. I suppose you look on with approval as she passes?

LOL, get real!

Are you seriously trying to tell me people don't know weed is illegal in NZ, after all this time? If you carry an illegal substance, regardless of what it is, or an illegal item (concealed weapon) and you are stopped by police, then you can reasonably expect to get punished if you get caught.

Whether someone lives in a fantasty world and thinks it is any business of the police or not, is irrelevant to the fact it *is* illegal in NZ presently.

Quota? Tell me about this... Also, please give me an example of someone convicted and marched off to jail in the past few years, for possession of enough weed for a single joint (and no other mitigating circumstances or prior convictions).

Samsung

Shop now on Samsung phones, tablets, TVs and more (affiliate link).

Handle9

11276 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2576671 30-Sep-2020 18:19

networkn:

Quota? Tell me about this... Also, please give me an example of someone convicted and marched off to jail in the past few years, for possession of enough weed for a single joint (and no other mitigating circumstances or prior convictions).

You made the claim that police don't care about possession (which isn't true) now when you have been given the stats are going off on another strawman.

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2576792 30-Sep-2020 20:50

Handle9:

That's manifestly untrue. The police claim that but it's not how the law is applied, particularly if you are a group they feel like targeting

This is obviously only anecdotal (and from circa 10 - 11 years ago) but having been on all three sides of the legal fence (working for judges, defence and prosecution) I don't recall many cases where someone got a possession-only charge by itself. Where a possession charge was present, typically the person was accused of other more serious crimes. And if found guilty of those, the judge will almost inevitably convict and discharge on the possession charge. Now I do distinctly recall a few possession-only cases originating from the Waitemata police district, which was then (and still is) widely known as one of the worst governed/managed police district with a high number of power-tripping cops.

Edit (to add more context and fix typos): And I made the reply before seeing the reference to MoJ stats, which whilst it does not necessarily show whether the persons charged faced other charges as well, does tend to show the cops remains quite... tenacious when it comes to enforcing possession laws. And this is quite illuminating -- even as someone relatively informed about the system, without having seen the stats for myself I'd never believe the cops were still this zealous. It really goes to show the importance of hard evidence.

networkn:

Quota? Tell me about this... Also, please give me an example of someone convicted and marched off to jail in the past few years, for possession of enough weed for a single joint (and no other mitigating circumstances or prior convictions).

Hey networkn, you do realise that people who read and post on a discussion board by definition can read, right? You were the one who claimed that the cops don't care at all. When confronted with hard evidence, you are trying to shift the goalposts.

Handle9

11276 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2576794 30-Sep-2020 20:54

dejadeadnz:

Handle9:

That's manifestly untrue. The police claim that but it's not how the law is applied, particularly if you are a group they feel like targeting

This is obviously only anecdotal (and from circa 10 - 11 years ago) but having been on all three sides of the legal fence (working for judges, defence and prosecution) I don't recall many cases where someone got a possession-only charge by itself. Where a possession charge was present, typically the person was accused of other more serious crimes. And if found guilty of those, the judge will almost inevitably convict and discharge on the possession charge. Now I do distinctly recall a few possession-only cases originating from the Waitemata police district, which was then (and still is) widely known as one of the worst governed/managed police district with a high number of power-tripping cops.

This is also anecdotal but I have a family member with a possession conviction. The circumstances were absolutely stupid (incredibly so) but he has a conviction for a stupid mistake as an 18 year old.

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2576798 30-Sep-2020 21:06

@Handle9 I also added a bit more context to my post above.

Rikkitic:

The other thing is it is known that police will use cannabis possession as a way of getting someone that they can't pin something else on if the individual also happens to have the bad luck of carrying a bit of personal weed. This is an abuse of the law.

Sorry but you are, as is the norm for people on GZ making legal assertions, manifestly wrong with regards to your statement above. The courts have actually considered cases where offenders were arrested on "holding" but legitimate charges (i.e. evidence existed and the cops could have legitimately arrested the accused for those) in order to get them into custody (for example) so that searches on their person/accompanying property can be lawfully made when they expect that such searches will be fruitful but could not otherwise legitimately make out the ground for searching for the ultimate items of interest prior to the arrest. Such ultimate items of interest have been held to be admissible.

It is however an established abuse of process of the courts (as legally defined, not in any person's vague opinion) to charge a person with a more serious crime, fail with the prosecution, but then try to bring forth lower level charges relating to the same incident/transaction to have essentially a second crack at the accused person. But that wasn't what you were talking about.

networkn

Networkn
32254 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2576799 30-Sep-2020 21:15

dejadeadnz:

Hey networkn, you do realise that people who read and post on a discussion board by definition can read, right? You were the one who claimed that the cops don't care at all. When confronted with hard evidence, you are trying to shift the goalposts.

Sigh.

Yes the numbers are higher than I expected, however were those soley cannabis possesion charges, or part of a larger group of charges ? Since others share anacdoetal stories, after work today, because I was curious, I spoke to a police officer I am friends with since high school. She said she has never arrested a single person for cannabis possession soley in her entire policing career. She seemed surprised when I asked her if she has ever stopped someone who was loitering and then searched them for cannabis (Again it was a No). She said over the time she has been an officer attitudes in the police department toward cannabis possession have changed a fair bit. Distribution/dealing not so much.

With approx 4.8M adults in NZ (People over 18), even if say (generously) half of those charges were really for soley cannabis possession, if the police are really worried about it, it's not much of a crusade!

@handle9 how long ago was your family member convicted for possession if you don't mind me asking?

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2576801 30-Sep-2020 21:25

networkn:

Sigh.

You can sigh as much as you like -- you were the one changing the goalposts. The other problem that you miss is the differences between police districts in terms of culture and mentality.

Handle9

11276 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2576802 30-Sep-2020 21:26

This was a fair time ago, in the early 2000s. As I said above the circumstances were incredibly stupid - if the story wasn't about someone I know personally I would say it was made up. Funnily enough they are Maori and from a family that weren't able to afford to pay for their own lawyer (or really sophisticated enough to understand their options) so went through the legal aid system.

18 year old boys/men are morons (I certainly was) who make stupid decisions (I certainly did) that probably shouldn't affect them for the rest of their lives unless they really do have a serious effect on others.

Your police friend may have never used possession as an excuse to search. I've experienced police using it as an excuse, which was fairly hilarious as I was clearly sober and there was no reason for them to search me for drugs.

From my family and friends experience (as police officers) police have plenty of grubs who will abuse their powers just as there are far far more who don't.

networkn

Networkn
32254 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2576803 30-Sep-2020 21:30

Handle9:

18 year old boys/men are morons (I certainly was) who make stupid decisions (I certainly did) that probably shouldn't affect them for the rest of their lives unless they really do have a serious effect on others.

I am inclined to agree that these types of mistakes shouldn't follow you the rest of your life, people make mistakes. I wonder though, do you think the same thing could/would happen in 2020?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | ... | 25