Jump to content
The Corroboree
J Smith

Consultation on implementation of model drug schedules for Commonwealth serious drug offences

Recommended Posts

Oh well by the looks of that the likes of Myrtillocactus, Trichs, Brugs & even the native daturas could be a no go zone.

Edited by shortly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is potentially very bad news. I wonder when we will find out the results? It's not like they will enforce this nationwide to those who have the odd Brug or pach in their garden, but the fact remains that anyone with these plants in their garden could be charged if they wanted to do so.

I expect all of us will be making submissions about this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm... Brug and Datura seems like a clueless addition to this. They need a botanist consultant to help draw up some more realistic regulation.

What I find interesting is that the sole source plant quoted for dimethyltryptamine is still Piptadenia sp.

There are some very explicit questions in the discussion paper on which this community should make comment. Especially with regard to live plants.

Section L.

Legitimate use defence - plants

90. The model controlled plant schedule expands the list of categories of plants and fungi. The

collection and use of certain plants by botanists and collectors raises the question of whether there is

a need for a legitimate use defence, and on what grounds this would be available. For example,

botanists or plant collectors may have a legitimate use of cactus species where possession would

otherwise be an offence.

91. Similarly, given that all genera of cannabis are controlled plants, cultivation of any variety is

an offence against Commonwealth legislation (subject to the defence in section 313.1 of the

Criminal Code). It may be timely, in the context of considering application of the model schedules,

to consider whether a defence might be warranted to allow commercial exploitation of industrial

hemp for fibre or other legitimate uses.

Question L

Does the model schedule of controlled plants create any problems of inadvertent criminalisation,

particularly in relation to the offence of selling a controlled plant within Australia?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For plant growers it already is an offence in the criminal code to

1) cultivate a controlled plant for a commercial purpose; or

2) possess plant material ... for commercial cultivation of controlled plants; or

3) sell any controlled plant.

The proposed schedule extends the list of controlled plants.

Goodbye to nurserys growing plants container dmt or mesc.

goodbye to nurserys growing brugs, datura, khat or krantom (sic).

Goodbye to selling plants, seeds or cuttings of any plants containing dmt or mesc.

Goodbye to selling brug, datura or khat cuttings, seeds or plants.

Goodbye to selling krantom (sic). Whatever the hell that is rolleyes.gif.

I'm in two minds about whether I should list the plants that contain mesc or dmt in my submission to highlight how ridiculous this suggestion is. On one hand I don't want to let the man into any secrets, on the other hand if I only include plants identified in peer reviewed journals they could find out that info themselves in they looked hard enough. Thoughts?

Also, some people may be interested in cross referencing the proposed schedules to the current criminal code - http://www.comlaw.gov.au/ComLaw/Legislation/ActCompilation1.nsf/framelodgmentattachments/AD40CB005B74CBECCA2576040024B618

Particularly Divs 303, 304 and 308.3.

Peace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

Edited by Casuarius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for bringing this to light. This is avery good opportunity to make submissions so that we don't get stuck with some stupid arbitrary laws. I can't believe they are even considering scheduling brugmansias :BANGHEAD2:

madhouse, I reckon a good list of published dmt results would be a wake up call for them same for mescaline. It can't hurt. The information already exists and to be honest I can't even see any harm in mentioning some of the species that are already plastered all over the web. Let's try and see the positive in this - there is a possibility to get an exemption clause so that collectors like us will be unaffected by these silly laws. I am not sure how this woul work in real life though. I guess intent and labelling/promotion might be the deciding factor. eg if you sell a plant as a collectos item then you're oK, but if you sell it for getting fucked up then you're done. bit silly, but I can live with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

Edited by Casuarius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the issue most of us have is the expansion of the controlled plant list to include a quarter of the Australian landscape.

Rather than us having to prove a legitimate use through an exemption would it not be preferable to make it an intent crime, ie to produce a plant for the production of whatever the particular alkaloid happens to be?

Rather than loose every sandlewood plantation a bush regen project or an ornamental cactus garden.

To enshrine every legitimate use in legislation & would prevent any development of new uses or industries

After all this was touted as being for the purpose of depriving organized crime of funds, & i don't know about you guys but the closest i've seen to organized crime profiting from brugs & cacti is bunnings.

On the up side to all this, i'm learning an enormous amount about the phytochemistry of our landscape. My god, the number of plants that have trace amounts of all kinds of alkaloids :blink:

alkaloids in dragon fruit and nicotine in the seed, who woulda thunk it. Oh well there go's a fledgling industry :BANGHEAD2:

If they get this in we should all be demanding fair compensation for the loss of what are after all perfectly legitimate hobbys, buisness & entire industries.

Edited by shortly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Sunrise,

It has come to my attention that the federal government is considering a Bill which will make it illegal to trade in any part of the Australian floral emblem, Acacia pycnantha aka golden wattle, along with many other types of wattle. As Australians will not be able to purchase these wattles should this Bill proceed, I'm sure you can imagine the impact this would have on our landscape. I personally believe that every Australian backyard should have a wattle growing in it, however it seems the federal government disagrees with this view. I would be happy to come onto your show to discuss why this poorly considered Bill should be scrapped. We owe it to our children to ensure they can grow up in a world where they are able to grow the floral emblem of this great country in their own backyard.

Yours sincerely,

M. Visites.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's now two submissions to Federal Parliament I have to do by March :BANGHEAD2:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who's behind this push anyway ?

Is this a case of police dictating what the laws should be ?

Why would anyone else give a rats arse about some of the species mentioned, most people go their whole life and never know what any of them are.

Police are meant to enforce laws not create them. Dangerous territory and another step towards a police state.

Will the police have to be trained in botany to identify what's legal and what's not, or will anyone with plants in their garden automatically be suspected of a crime ?

And what of plants that were already on the property when you moved in, will laymen be expected to hire a botanist for a survey of their property for "naughty" plants when they move in.

So as it stands now I can piss up my entire income and then go to a charity for assistance with food,rent,power bills etc and be a burden to society, but I can't have an ornamental tree in my backyard.

:wave-finger: fuck you fear driven control freaks, why don't you just buy a dog and save it from itself.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone concerned needs to make a submission about this, to the goverment and then letters to every nursery that we can think of that will (inevitably) be affected.

Perhaps we should all email GetUp about this? They have political clout and the ability to reach hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of concerned people. I think we should do it.

The fact they are trying to schedule any plant with precursors is insane. There will be hundreds of Acacia species made illegal due to this, most Solanum species will go, etc. While they may consider exemptions for collectors, we can't be guaranteed that we could get those exemptions and if we don't we'll be harbouring illegal plants or giving up up interests.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for posting this MHV. This is serious stuff

Tripsis talking to GetUp is a fantastic idea. How do we approach them. Anyone got any contacts?

Would it be better to circulate a petition or organise some kind of email campaign, or to come up with lots of individually worded sensible responses to this threat ( not a word I'd use lightly )

I have so many objections swirling round in my angry head, but it would be more productive if they were carefully worded.

Aside from individual liberties ( the most important ) my next concern is for people who choose to use plants for medicinal treatment having that option closed off. In the past I've used Caapi, kratom and kava to great medicinal benefit. Research into those species, and into Salvia D, has been completely stifled in .au as a result. What's next, eh?

We should be accumulating cures, not ridding ourselves of them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do I read that right? HCL, ie pool acid a trafickable precurser? Murcury and magnesium too? remote control fuel? WTF are they serious?

Fucking eugenol too, so that means clove oil. These kunts r going nazi on our ass.

Surely not, I must be seeing things, CALCIUM?????

Platinum? How can they do that? It's a precious metal and lots of exxy jewelery is made of it.

Edited by naja naja

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can anybody shed light on what it means when there is no figure stated for trafficable, marketable or commercial quantities in the proposed schedule on page 40 detailing plants that would be scheduled under proposed changes?

Is it just that amounts haven't been allocated to these plants? Seems an odd omission.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tripsis talking to GetUp is a fantastic idea. How do we approach them. Anyone got any contacts?

Would it be better to circulate a petition or organise some kind of email campaign, or to come up with lots of individually worded sensible responses to this threat ( not a word I'd use lightly )

I have so many objections swirling round in my angry head, but it would be more productive if they were carefully worded.

I've never approached GetUp with an issue before, but am on their mail list for campaigns. I guess we should each just email them with a link to the document of concern and raise our ideas of the problems with it. i suppose whether they run with it or not may depend on how much they already have on their plate, but if they have time, I see no reason why they wouldn't be concerned. This is, afterall, a move to restrict many of our freedoms, something which they should be standing against.

I think a petition would be good, but our submissions to them directly needs to be done as individuals in writing (not email), as they need to be able to present those submissions in the senate or wherever. Of course, these submissions need to be as professional as possible, detailing the huge number of problems with the proposed legislative changes and why this should not be done. We need to be careful not to just sound like a bunch of drug takers concerned with our future abilities to get high.

I suggested the following on AE:

We should compile a list of points in this thread we wish to present as to why this idea of their's is such an incredibly bad idea. As many points as possible. E.g., the fact that they want to schedule plants with precursors in them means that countless hundreds or even thousands of species will be federally illegal. So in bullet points, we should keep a running list of idea we think are good to expand on in opur submissions. Then when we have a sufficient number of topics with which to bombard them with, we can make our submissions. Not just to the government, but to every nursery and plant seller we can think of.

A friend also suggested this. We should find out exactly who and from which party this is coming from. If labour, perhaps contacting strongly opinionated right-wingers such as Alan Jones and the media in general would be a good idea, if we can present this as a terrible idea wasting taxpayewrs money, etc. Make labour look bad.

Edited by tripsis
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The logistics..................

Every police officer would have to be educated in atleast basic plant ID, many plant not able to be ID'd well unless in flower. Even nurseries can't ID cacti, so not too much hope for cops.

They would have to do the most comprehensive chemical taxonomy study ever carried out. If they wish to regulate any and all species which contain said compounds. Then they should be able to supply u with the species name of every single species your not allowed to grow. Otherwise how are you meant to know a plant contains any said compounds unless the plant species has been positively ID'd and is listed in Law. Otherwise there is no possible way to "know or even presume" that there is an illegal precurser within any said plant, unless (A) There was a comprehensive list of plant KNOWN to contain said illegals, (B) You tested each and every plant that exists within your garden unless it has been tested before, which would be time consuming, illegal if u actually found an active :rolleyes: and just not feasable in reality or © MOST LIKELY, they'll form a list and add as more become known in scientific literature (I hope to fuck they don't consider wikiped ia a reliable source of information)

Otherwise I can imagine scenario's along the lines of... Joe Blogs gets busted for herb, has a native garden and or cacti. They decide to try and throw book at joe and test every acacia and cacti in his garden. Depending on results, joe may be charged even though no scientific literature exists to let u know this plant contains the said illegal in the first place for tor u to be enabled with the knowledge of which plant u r allowed to grow and which ones u arn't. Or joe may have not even cultivated plant. may be from previous owner, remnant bush, stray seed, etc,etc If they remove plants at the time and they test negative, compensation for loss plant is unlikely. Imagine if they hacked up and removed your huge gold barrel only to find out it was inactive. Large cacti and many small are very expensive to collectors. Nurseries all over australia having to destroy millions of dollars in stock should these laws pass. Big compo claims unless there is a grace period. Worst of all, by making a list. U inform every tom dick and harry to plants, drugs and info they never would have happened along before. And they make more things illegal to try and curb organized crime. Well that's rich, tech if your are selling those plants now it's not illegal, hence not a crime and hence not categorable as organized crime FFS! But since they want to make them illegal it will ENABLE organized crime to take advantage and prosper moreso as unknowns now become IN DEMAND and a market grows to meet that demand.

I could write a novel length reply on how fucked up and rediculous this proposal is! Let alone, unenforcable. If this law has any major hurdle getting through I rekon that will be the catch. There is just no point putting yet more, unenforcable laws in to legislation

Edited by naja naja
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That should probably be the main argument. Because if there's one thing which can piss an Australian off, it's a lame duck government which wastes his taxes.

A friend also suggested this. We should find out exactly who and from which party this is coming from. If labour, perhaps contacting strongly opinionated right-wingers such as Alan Jones and the media in general would be a good idea, if we can present this as a terrible idea wasting taxpayewrs money, etc. Make labour look bad.

Playing vote-dependent ideologues like a couple of puppets... Eewww, I like that! :devil:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright, I've made a (hasty) submission to GetUp. Please comment or vote if you think if worthwhile, or even make a new and better worded submission if you wish.

http://suggest.getup.org.au/forums/60819-campaign-ideas/suggestions/1384297-stopping-the-federal-illegalisation-of-thousands-o?ref=title

I will be on an week long walk tomorrow, so won't be able to follow this thread until after then.

Edited by tripsis
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That should probably be the main argument. Because if there's one thing which can piss an Australian off, it's a lame duck government which wastes his taxes.

Playing vote-dependent ideologues like a couple of puppets... Eewww, I like that! :devil:

That would be labor that launched it :BANGHEAD2: , here

http://www.dpmc.gov.au/media/statement_2008_12_04.cfm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

Edited by Casuarius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck with your "war" aussies, I think your gonna need it.

Make much noise and be heard, you owe it to your plants!

People don't fight for their rights in Australia we have a bit of a whinge and then go back to watching TV.

PNG is looking better all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From AE... (I can't be bothered retyping it)

C'mon folks we can do better than this, surely. If we can compile a list of points we want to make, it'll help us all with our submissions.

Personally, I wouldn't know a precursor if it hit me in the face. Chemistry is not my strong point. So those that have a greater knowledge in that area could make lists of the species that would become illegal due to their having porecursors in them.

A law-student friend of mine has suggested we can even do a group submission. It would be treated as a single submission, but they would acknowledge that a group has signed it. Basically we all have the one letter, but individually send it in signed saying that we agree with the contents of the letter.

Also, sign that GetUp suuggestion! Or make a new and better one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×