Don't worry about drugs. Helium possession is what will get you busted!

Forums › Off topic › Don't worry about drugs. Helium possession is what will get you busted!

Rikkitic

Awrrr
15637 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#204813 18-Oct-2016 15:59

Anyone who thinks we don’t live in a police state ought to take a look at the most recent RNZ headline. If the report is to be believed, a little old lady well into her 70s was raided by police who had a warrant for her helium balloon kit! The suggestion is that they are on a rampage of intimidation because of the current euthanasia debate.

No wonder they don’t have time to attend burglaries or patrol the streets. It almost feels like I am back in America!

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

9114 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1653032 18-Oct-2016 16:04

There is far more to this than what is in the media I suspect

Linux

Mighty Ape

Affiliate link

Affiliate link: Shop Mighty Ape for electronics, games, computers books and more.

DarthKermit

5346 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1653034 18-Oct-2016 16:04

*reports your post to the secret police for brazen and open dissent*

Geektastic

16816 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1653048 18-Oct-2016 16:19

Not wishing to be remotely controversial but why would the police consider it a function of their remit to prevent someone from ending their own life? Someone else's - sure. Their own? Not so much.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1653058 18-Oct-2016 16:37

Geektastic:

Not wishing to be remotely controversial but why would the police consider it a function of their remit to prevent someone from ending their own life? Someone else's - sure. Their own? Not so much.

So if they find someone about to jump from a bridge, their only interest should be to make sure they haven't got outstanding speed camera fines and have arranged for someone to clean up the mess?

You are being controversial. Forgiven because it's almost impossible to discuss the subject without being controversial.

frankv

5119 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1653062 18-Oct-2016 16:41

Geektastic:

Not wishing to be remotely controversial but why would the police consider it a function of their remit to prevent someone from ending their own life? Someone else's - sure. Their own? Not so much.

Because it's a crime.

Because it's their job to keep people safe (even from themselves).

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1653066 18-Oct-2016 16:45

frankv:

Geektastic:

Not wishing to be remotely controversial but why would the police consider it a function of their remit to prevent someone from ending their own life? Someone else's - sure. Their own? Not so much.

Because it's a crime.

Because it's their job to keep people safe (even from themselves).

Suicide isn't a crime - encouraging or aiding suicide is.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1653072 18-Oct-2016 16:57

Several aspects to that case which are fraught with difficulty:

Evidence from overseas suggests that many/most people using that method are mentally unwell, not terminally ill.

Very difficult to pick up in post mortem. If it (or other types / method) was to be approved in certain cases, then there'd need to be very strict protocols in place. Freely available DIY kits with instructions is a crazy idea (IMO).

I'm not sure how the hell you could rationally have a system where DIY suicide kits were freely available and/or "common knowledge", but avoid having others who are emotionally involved (for better or worse) in some way aiding or "encouraging" use. It gets back to the above - very strict protocols would be needed.

That's why they raided the house - the woman was an "activist" for aided suicide now - not just buying a kit with which to top herself - though that may have been her intention.

Geektastic

16816 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1653075 18-Oct-2016 17:08

Fred99:

frankv:

Geektastic:

Not wishing to be remotely controversial but why would the police consider it a function of their remit to prevent someone from ending their own life? Someone else's - sure. Their own? Not so much.

Because it's a crime.

Because it's their job to keep people safe (even from themselves).

Suicide isn't a crime - encouraging or aiding suicide is.

And also, what on earth would be the point of making it a crime?! You won't really have a vast number of defendants to haul into the dock, now will you?!

scuwp

3583 posts

Uber Geek

#1653078 18-Oct-2016 17:22

Police have an all encompassing responsibility to protect life and property. They cannot ignore a suicide attempt or threat of suicide.

Always be yourself, unless you can be Batman, then always be the Batman

Rikkitic

Awrrr
15637 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1653079 18-Oct-2016 17:24

Fred99:

I'm not sure how the hell you could rationally have a system where DIY suicide kits were freely available and/or "common knowledge", but avoid having others who are emotionally involved (for better or worse) in some way aiding or "encouraging" use. It gets back to the above - very strict protocols would be needed.

People determined to end it all for whatever reason are perfectly capable of finding a way. You can whisper behind your hand all you like and it won't make a blind bit of difference.

Tall buildings and trains are current examples of DIY suicide kits. Unfortunately these leave a considerable mess behind and severely traumatise witnesses and train drivers. I think almost anything is better than the cravenly hypocritical 'if we pretend it isn't there maybe it will go away' attitude that currently governs policy.

However, the debate at the moment is not about suicide as such, but about allowing and enabling those suffering (in all senses of the word) from terminal illness to choose a humane death when and how they wish. I see this as a fundamental human right.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1653080 18-Oct-2016 17:30

Geektastic:

And also, what on earth would be the point of making it a crime?! You won't really have a vast number of defendants to haul into the dock, now will you?!

In the past and in more religious times and places it has been, forfeit the estate to the crown, deny burial in the town cemetery etc.

That'd probably lead to all kinds of corruption by officials - if they found someone very wealthy, dead with a dozen musket ball holes in their backs, the town clerk would be insisting it was one of the worst cases of suicide he'd ever seen.

networkn

27713 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1653081 18-Oct-2016 17:38

Fred99:

frankv:

Geektastic:

Not wishing to be remotely controversial but why would the police consider it a function of their remit to prevent someone from ending their own life? Someone else's - sure. Their own? Not so much.

Because it's a crime.

Because it's their job to keep people safe (even from themselves).

Suicide isn't a crime - encouraging or aiding suicide is.

They weren't there to arrest the old woman, they were taking possession of the Helium for suspected attempt to assist suicide!

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1653083 18-Oct-2016 17:42

Rikkitic:

Fred99:

I'm not sure how the hell you could rationally have a system where DIY suicide kits were freely available and/or "common knowledge", but avoid having others who are emotionally involved (for better or worse) in some way aiding or "encouraging" use. It gets back to the above - very strict protocols would be needed.

People determined to end it all for whatever reason are perfectly capable of finding a way. You can whisper behind your hand all you like and it won't make a blind bit of difference.

Tall buildings and trains are current examples of DIY suicide kits. Unfortunately these leave a considerable mess behind and severely traumatise witnesses and train drivers. I think almost anything is better than the cravenly hypocritical 'if we pretend it isn't there maybe it will go away' attitude that currently governs policy.

However, the debate at the moment is not about suicide as such, but about allowing and enabling those suffering (in all senses of the word) from terminal illness to choose a humane death when and how they wish. I see this as a fundamental human right.

Sure - but making available methods and advice for clean painless suicide will encourage more suicide, as it's "normalised" to the point where it's acceptable. In most cases it's not very good at all. I don't know (personally) of one person who when faced with a terminal illness asked to die (yes it does happen - ie Robin Williams and others) . I do know of many cases where (ordinary) people killed themselves for crazy reasons - when there was no need, leaving behind a tragedy.

And that brings up palliative care, perhaps the subject of Helen Kelly as it's topical. She should have been allowed to use marijuana, heroin too if she wanted - I'm very comfortable with that. Assisted suicide - perhaps, had that been her wish, but AFAIK it wasn't (and seldom is in cases like that). That should never be a DIY option. Plenty of Drs OTOH would happily prescribe heroin (diamorphine) though and already do prescribe morphine, knowing that it will bring forward a (relatively) painless death. It (present law) kind of works as it is, some revision/change is needed, but it doesn't need to be turned on it's head - as some advocates seem to be demanding. In my opinion - of course.

jeffnz

2870 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1653086 18-Oct-2016 17:53

Rikkitic:

Anyone who thinks we don’t live in a police state ought to take a look at the most recent RNZ headline. If the report is to be believed, a little old lady well into her 70s was raided by police who had a warrant for her helium balloon kit! The suggestion is that they are on a rampage of intimidation because of the current euthanasia debate.

No wonder they don’t have time to attend burglaries or patrol the streets. It almost feels like I am back in America!

Think you have read far too much in far too little.

Key for me is

A police spokesperson, who refused to be named, said via email that the warrant was served as part of "ongoing police enquiries".

"We are not able to get into specifics at this time," the email read.

Another spokeswoman corroborated what McGrath understood from the visiting officers; She herself was not under scrutiny but rather held evidence relevant to a wider investigation."

Source

bit of a slow day methinks

Galaxy S10

Garmin Fenix 5

Rikkitic

Awrrr
15637 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1653098 18-Oct-2016 18:04

With any subject like this, opposing camps tend to fall back on extreme arguments. In practice, I think adequate safeguards could be put into place. It doesn't have to be an all or nothing proposition. I believe human dignity is better served by allowing people to die peacefully in a manner of their own choosing than by subjecting them to forced prolonged misery against their will for the sake of a few more days or weeks of pointless existence. Other countries seem to be able to cope with this without collapsing into murderous moral decay andI'm sure we can too.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

1 | 2 | 3 | 4