Hard News: Dreaming of a world without evidence
54 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 Newer→ Last
-
Just quickly: http://www.pmcsa.org.nz/ on evidence and policy formation.
The PM noted this was coming out and opined it might have an impact on ‘advice’. As opposed, presumably, to policy.
[And the press release]
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
The PM noted this was coming out and opined it might have an impact on ‘advice’. As opposed, presumably, to policy
Arrggh.
-
I believe you! I once inhaled a dose of curry powder (by error ) and it wasn't a good experience
-
Ahh outdated laws requiring evidence, as opposed to new, futuristic, forward thinking laws that Dunne suggests based on look and smell.
Guy's a fucking idiot.
-
"We should consider legalising the production, sale and distribution of drugs. Legalisation does not mean that drugs are good. But we have to see it as a strategy to weaken and break the economic system that allows cartels to make huge profits, which in turn increases their power and capacity to corrupt."
Former Mexican president Vicente Fox
Shame he didn't mention this when he was President.
Peter Dunne, like others of his ilk, need to realise that the War on drugs is actually a war on people, who just happen to take drugs. Prohibition creates the market which is the real problem. Yeah, we all know this, why don't our politicians?. -
Russell Brown, in reply to
Peter Dunne, like others of his ilk, need to realise that the War on drugs is actually a war on people, who just happen to take drugs.
There's a guy called Julian Buchanan, just joined VUW, who is very good value on this theme.
-
I've tried some of them. I'd concur with most of what the tripme people said. My main concern is that they're really new, so the long term health effects are not really known, unlike the good old fashioned weed (which is not without side-effects, but you know what they are).
-
I would be interested to know if Peter Dunne has any brewery shares. For that matter it would be good to know which, if any, of our current crop of professional dole bludgers, politicians, have shares in the pedallers of the legal drug that is alcohol.
-
Steve Barnes, in reply to
unlike the good old fashioned weed (which is not without side-effects, but you know what they are).
Side effects? What.. what was that... God I'm hungry... what were we talking about again?.
-
@Russell - Julian Buchanan is a smart guy - for Wellington-based folks, he's giving his first public lecture next week - titled "Problem drug use, stigma and exclusion."
While the decision to regulate is a very good (dare I say, a 'common sense' decision), it's gonna take a while to actually do so, because the law allowing regulations is drafted in a such a way that it cannot technically be used (#fail). And ultimately, the law needs to be updated so that these products can't hit the market until we know something about them - it's very strange these things can be sold without the industry being honest about what they're selling.
So whether the government likes it or not, they're gonna have to amend our 35-year-old drug law just to keep up with these modern times.
-
I wonder if this will be the round-about resolution to the war on drugs: synthetic analoges that replicate the effects of traditional drugs but can't be banned in a more process oriented, policy-based political culture.
-
Steve Barnes, in reply to
synthetic analoges that replicate the effects of traditional drugs
That are manufactured by big pharmaceutical companies, I can see Key and Joyce loving this.
-
Fooman, in reply to
I would be interested to know if Peter Dunne has any brewery shares.
Or some sort of involvement with Big Tobacco?
FM
-
It would be interesting to know how much mr Dunne with his superior genes has invested in maintaining the tabacco, alcohol monopoly. The desire to get whacked is part of being human, as much as how you prefer your sex or the colour of your skin.It is hard to find any culture that does not, Quat, Kava, cocoa, opium and the stuff the yamono blow up each other noses'. That the same people committed to bombing the shit out of innocent afgani kids are also the ones that seek to controll what we ingest for their own benifits gives some clue as to how screwed up drug laws are.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
I wonder if this will be the round-about resolution to the war on drugs: synthetic analoges that replicate the effects of traditional drugs but can’t be banned in a more process oriented, policy-based political culture.
Quite possibly. But that can lead to some perverse outcomes.
One “legal” high has already been taken off the market because its active ingredient was deemed a THC analog – it was banned because it was, um, banned.
That’s the reason that BZP was allowed for so long, while some possibly more benign substances, phenethylamines, were banned because they fell foul of the extremely broad analog provisions in our Misuse of Drugs Act; ie, they were deemed analogs of MDMA etc. It doesn’t make a lot of sense.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
Quite possibly. But that can lead to some perverse outcomes.
I was thinking the most perverse outcome is that it's almost as bad in terms of production safety to consumers as the uncontrolled manufacture that illegal drugs suffer from. Better to have fewer, better tested drugs.
-
Fooman, you got it. Maybe if Cosmic Corner had the funds to take Dunne on an all expenses paid "awayday", then he’d be more amenable to them.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
I was thinking the most perverse outcome is that it’s almost as bad in terms of production safety to consumers as the uncontrolled manufacture that illegal drugs suffer from. Better to have fewer, better tested drugs.
The trade in the grey-area chemicals is amazing. Factories in Asia produce them literally by the ton, and sell them online by the kilo. It's hard to know how good the process is, but they're not actually made in sheds. It's all totes legal.
-
Kumara Republic, in reply to
All this legal inconsistency between weed and booze/ciggies continues to irritate me. Maybe they're running out of things to scapegoat?
Or some sort of involvement with Big Tobacco?
Let me guess... is the Paul Adams mentioned on the NZMA page the same God's Little Rally Driver?
-
Fooman, in reply to
Let me guess... is the Paul Adams mentioned on the NZMA page the same God's Little Rally Driver?
FM
-
Rich of Observationz, in reply to
There are ISO standards and the like around chemical products, as well as technologies to measure purity.
If parliament was really concerned for the health of drug users, they would require that restricted substances were appropriately certified to contain what it says on the tin.
-
Steve Barnes, in reply to
That the same people committed to bombing the shit out of innocent afgani kids are also the ones that seek to controll what we ingest for their own benifits gives some clue as to how screwed up drug laws are.
+ several billion
-
I read an article in some newspaper when Dunne announced this that quoted a guy who actually manufactures (or imports) these "legal highs" and he basically said he would just get the "chemists" to make other legal highs if Dunne banned cannabinomimetics.
It's such bad policy that it really doesn't deserve a mention, or debate, just ridicule.
-
Yes Nick. If we were to legalise drugs, you know along the lines of ACT policy regarding less interference in the liberty of the individual, would you think it a good thing to put a tax on those drugs or would that go against you principals?.
-
ACTs always had this big chance to really go through with the idea of liberty and take a stand on drugs. Private conversations with ACToids indicate quite a lot of sympathy to the idea. But it never seems to make much headway in their publicly stated policy.
I expect that economic liberty is more important to them than social. That's how it came across to me, and why I lost all interest long ago. It seemed to me that surely they could at least openly say they supported widespread legalization. But realpolitik took them to where they are now.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.