Hard News by Russell Brown

Read Post

Hard News: Splore 2019 – Please Don't F*ck This Up Part 3: Harm Reduction

11 Responses

  • andin,

    fear of the blowback from the general public. But based on my experience talking to the general public about this stuff, people are far ahead of politicians,

    The general public is a many headed beast, its when it finds a voice in the form of a talkback radio tool or local MP usually NAT, it is at its most vitriol spewing worst. If the delicate flower politicians can weather that is always the worry.
    Many people have to live with all kinds of things going on around them so they learn to be more forgiving, turning that into legislation means allowing the unfettered fears of people who have never come into personal contact before this, to do whatever it is they do.

    raglan • Since Mar 2007 • 1881 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Young,

    Prohibitionist propaganda alert: With the assistance of David Farrar's Curia Market Research firm, Family First has just released a somewhat suspect opinion poll. eighty five percent say cannabis can be neurotoxic for young smokers (which is why there's an age of consent provision in the proposed legislation), eighty one percent think stoned driving under the influence of pot can cause accidents (how many demonstrable cases are on file from the NZTA? "Think?"). sixty three percent are concerned regular pot users aren't employable (so what about local infrastructure and employment training options? What about local rates of alcohol consumption?) forty nine percent think cannabis use will increase if decriminalised ("Think?" What does the data actually say?!) ...thirty percent *disagree* with the proposition that tobacco companies want cannabis prohibition weakened, thirty five percent think useage will *remain the same* in the event of decriminalisation and twenty percent think there will be no effect on employment prospects. And only seven percent want the law to stay the way it is!!!: The sample measured 1000 respondents, and was sampled in April 2019: https://www.familyfirst.org.nz/2019/04/shock-cannabis-poll-yes-to-medicinal-no-to-legalising/

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 563 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown, in reply to Craig Young,

    Prohibitionist propaganda alert: With the assistance of David Farrar’s Curia Market Research firm, Family First has just released a somewhat suspect opinion poll.

    It's an extremely suspect poll, one which appears to breach at least the spirit of the NZ Political Polling Code. The question order shown in the formal report loads in all those dubious questions ahead of the primary voting intention question.

    The poll script also doesn't mention the law, not once, yet Family First's article does. It's stinky as all hell.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22747 posts Report Reply

  • andin, in reply to Russell Brown,

    Family Furs

    Can Bob McCoskrie just eat a Gummy Bear on live TV so we can all watch, please.

    raglan • Since Mar 2007 • 1881 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel, in reply to Russell Brown,

    David Farrar’s Curia Market Research firm

    and...

    It’s stinky as all hell.

    Seeing it is such an entrenched part of National's 'Old Boys network' perhaps it should more aptly be called OBscuria Market Research...

    One wonders if its naming as Curia is in relation to the Roman Catholic court of justice, and other public tribunes - albeit self-styled like the self-serving and misleadingly named 'Taxpayers Union' (also founded by Farrar)...
    ...or was it by the more obscure route of an anagram of 'Auric' - an ion of gold but also (and more probably) a tribute to the Bond villain, Goldfinger - Auric is his first name...

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7886 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Young,

    The sound below is Family First tieing itself in knots over its stance on medicinal cannabis: https://www.familyfirst.org.nz/2019/04/modern-medical-marijuana-is-more-potent-dangerous-than-ever-before/

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 563 posts Report Reply

  • Neil,

    The effective decriminalisation of small time possession and use is welcome news even if the government is choosing to be coy about it.

    But as others are pointing out there needs to be a substantial boost to treatment funding as the other part of the equation.

    Something else that should be a very high priority is increased funding and resourcing of acute mental health facilities. That is where the most vulnerable wind up and at present these units are being turned into war zones by drug use and consequent anti-social behaviour placing other patients and staff at great risk.

    Specialist secure detox units could be one part of the solution. Separating those with violent P rage from vulnerable people with mental health issues. It’s often the case now that people admitted to acute inpatient units are exposed to violent and predatory behaviour which is highly traumatic.

    Since Nov 2016 • 346 posts Report Reply

  • andin, in reply to Craig Young,

    Family First tieing itself in knots

    Wow that is just sick, if anything it is an indictment of US mental health care. The person they use as an example to push their agenda, had blazingly obvious mental health issues. That needed clinical care, which were obviously neglected in his case.
    That his tragic story can be used like that shows how unscrupulous FF are.

    raglan • Since Mar 2007 • 1881 posts Report Reply

  • steven crawford, in reply to Neil,

    Separating those with violent P rage from vulnerable people with mental health issues.

    Thats touching on an urban myth. It’s true that some meth addicts have become psychotic and violent, but it’s not common. They normally sleep for a couple of days when they enter treatment centres.

    I know you are talking about other serious mental health problems being aggravated by meth. I just thought I would relay in addition, what the residential drug and alcohol treatment managers say about meth. Another thing about meth is that it will cause irreversible brain damage with long term use. Don’t get addicted to the crap!

    Atlantis • Since Nov 2006 • 4306 posts Report Reply

  • Neil, in reply to steven crawford,

    True it’s not necessarily the majority of people coming off meth but the people being seen in residential settings may already have gone through the more intense part of withdrawal with paramedics and in ED.

    The meth rampage is not an urban myth. The paramedic protocol is physical restraint and IV ketamine.

    The brain damage is one the most troubling aspects. There’s a frightening number of young people coming into adulthood with meth induced brain damage that will place increasing demands on health resources and sadly prison resources.

    But it’s not every meth user. However it is a group that appear to be being left out of the current harm minimisation debate. And they are the most vulnerable and most at risk to themselves and others.

    People who have the wherewithal to engage in a residential setting don’t pose quite the same dilemmas and risk as those that don’t. And those that don’t I think have less chance of having their voices heard.

    Since Nov 2016 • 346 posts Report Reply

  • steven crawford, in reply to Neil,

    But it’s not every meth user. However it is a group that appear to be being left out of the current harm minimisation debate. And they are the most vulnerable and most at risk to themselves and others.

    You have hit on something I find hard to articulate. PTSD (complex) plus self medication equals an expensive social problem that isn’t fixed with ignorance.

    Atlantis • Since Nov 2006 • 4306 posts Report Reply

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.