Posts by Steve Barnes
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Legality of Cannabis by Country
Interesting read and graphic. Apparently legal in North Korea but you never know what really goes on in North Korea.
Uruguay seems to have gone the most sensible way, legalise and tax.
And who would have thought those up tight Swiss would allow you to grow your own?.
As for India The joint campaign: Should we not legalize recreational use of Cannabis?
We seem so backward and ignorant here. -
I put a post on the Heralds site the other day and, remarkably, got a sane and interesting response in respect of the Cultural shift toward illicit drugs and the Puffing Dolphins…
Barnzy
“""legalise the safe ones. Mushrooms, mescaline and peyote, all have been used for thousands of years and have been shown to be safe. And marijuana, the most widely used drug in the US."* If that had been done, there wouldn’t be any of the synthetics, “which are far more dangerous”.” 100% correct. The problem is the “Do Gooders” that want to control everybody else’s lives while keeping their eyes closed to reality on the grounds that “Drugs are bad, M’kay” Alcohol and Tobacco are known to be far more harmful that the occasional “Joint” but accepted by society as fine if used in moderation but mention cannabis or any other natural recreational substance and we are told they are a gateway to hell and the Devil himself. Dunne, in his infinite wisdom, decided that synthetics were preferable to the natural substances that have been used for thousands of years, playing God much? And they say its the “Druggies” that don’t want to face reality.”Graham – Howick
Drugs such as you mentioned have been used for thousands of years. However their use was generally restricted to ritual/religious/war use. Alcohol on the other hand was used in many countries as a food and water substitute because of a) the lack of food and b) The water was to dangerous to drink.The use of drugs/tobacco and alcohol the way it is used today is a relatively new phenomenon. Some one realized their was a market and money to made. Hence their use changed from the ritual/religious/necessary/war to a commercial setting bringing about the problems and debate we have today.
Not that Dolphins have much truck with ritual/religious/war scenarios.
* David E Nichols, Quoted from Hidden Dangers of legal highs Article by Mike Power
-
Hard News: A Big Idea, in reply to bmk,
Build cheap housing which will both employ people and lower the cost of housing.
Yup, old established techniques that have been tried and tested over millennia, not so much the mock Tuscan micro Mc Mansions we have foisted upon us.
-
Hard News: A Big Idea, in reply to bmk,
I’m not in KS but if I were it would feel like a tax.
How about "Deductions for expenses incurred" instead?, sounds more friendly than Tax. Whereas KS is more like "Deductions for expenses that will occur at a time when you ain't got much coming in"
-
Hard News: A Big Idea, in reply to Moz,
But since it’s designed to do exactly the opposite I’m not seeing how it helps me.
Apparently we are here to help others. I just don't know what the others are here for.
-
Hard News: Illegal Highs, in reply to BenWilson,
I think the new name for Dunne should be “Silver Hammer”.
The suggestion that John Key has lost his moral compass with his suggestion that "Other Jurisdictshuns, or Rats, are better places to test this shit rather than here, with us bunnies.
I guess that must have some baring on the strength of the Silver Hammer's personality.
</coat> -
Imagine what would happen if we introduced a little supply side economics into this.
The biggest problem facing most people is the cost of housing, rent or mortgage.
Say by introducing building sector reforms allowing people more latitude in building their own houses, get rid of some of the knee-jerk reactions to the National Party inspired leaky building debacle.
(The leaky building chaos was caused by bowing to a few companies who wished to increase their profits by allowing unsuitable products, monolithic cladding and untreated timber to name but two. This and the destructuring of local council oversight by allowing private companies to “sign off” buildings as suitable without adhering to accepted best practice, a result of the 1995 building act.)
Now, if we were to return to realistic demands of standards as opposed to the stupid counter productive “Builder” licensing regime and encouraged local councils to adopt a more user friendly “self build” policy we might actually get somewhere.
This would go a long way in restructuring Christchurch, cutting unemployment, increasing tax take ( income, company and gst) and allow us all to save a little too. All the while increasing the supply of housing thus making it more affordable.
Howdya like them “apples”? -
Damn it, I always thought he was Welsh.
But…Mr Jones is one of New Zealand’s foremost experts in the seafood industry, given his long and controversial career at the Treaty of Waitangi Fisheries Commission,
Hooten, Paywalled
So we can still sing…
Whale Kipper Whelk.. um
In the Eel side.
Still fishy though but we have come to expect that sort of thing from the greedhead control freaks eh? -
Legal Beagle: All of these things are…, in reply to Kumara Republic,
And that very sus law went up in smoke with the 1981 Brixton riots.
The suss law was the main cause of those riots. Many minorities were being singled out by the police who were using this law, Vagrancy Act 1824, as a "weapon" to quell public disquiet at the policies of the Thatcher Govt. It wasn't a new law but a "re-use" of archaic law re-purposed to counter perceived revolutionary rumblings from the "rotten boroughs" full of those nasty darkies.
I was there, I am scarred, I still feel unease when I see someone dressed like Thatcher.... EEEEEK!..... Collins -
Not for the first time have I been perplexed and bewildered by “New and Improved ” laws.
here is a bit about the Sus Law back in the UK back in the day.1824 legislation
The power to act on “sus” was found in part of section 4 of the Vagrancy Act 1824, which provided that:
every suspected person or reputed thief, frequenting any river, canal, or navigable stream, dock, or basin, or any quay, wharf, or warehouse near or adjoining thereto, or any street, highway, or avenue leading thereto, or any place of public resort, or any avenue leading thereto, or any street, or any highway or any place adjacent to a street or highway; with intent to commit an arrestable offence
—section 4, Vagrancy Act 1824
“shall be deemed a rogue and vagabond” and would be guilty of an offence, and be liable to be imprisoned for up to three months. This effectively permitted the police to stop and search, and even arrest, anyone found in a public place on the grounds that they suspected that they might intend to commit an offence.
In order to bring a prosecution under the Act, the police had to prove that the defendant had committed two acts:
the first, that established them as a “suspected person” (by acting suspiciously), and
the second, that provided intent to commit an arrestable offence.Suspicion and Intent, neither of which are objective, they are purely subjective and fall prone to abuse by the powers that be.
I suspect that this is the thinking behind the change… “Why do they make it so hard for us to fuck over the obvious scumbags”
Yeah well, like it or not, even “scumbags” have rights.Little note as for today…
Ruben "The Hurricane" Carter died today (ish) champion of the world and champion of justice.
He spent about the same amount of time in jail as Teina Pora and for the same reason….