hutch Posted January 25, 2011 ...or a clever one of us. ballzac.......you didn't? make em look foolish from the inside Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ballzac Posted January 26, 2011 Haha, nah wasn't me, lol. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ballzac Posted January 26, 2011 Well, I have found the responses on the Dave's garden forum to be depressingly nonchalant: http://davesgarden.com/community/forums/t/1151023/ From a Brugmansia grower: Ummm ...I don't think they will get away with plundering our gardens.This seems to be a drug related issue. Get Up is a political group. This is a gardening group here ...Graham Ross sells Brugs ...so do many reputable places. Thanks for the info though. I guess in this community we are used to plants being taken away. More mainstream gardeners are not used to this and don't really believe it happens. Perhaps if these laws pass, it will be the best outcome as it might wake some people the fuck up. Also, the proposed laws are so unenforcible, that maybe the powers that be will become slacker about enforcing these sort of laws in general. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shortly Posted January 26, 2011 ballzac.......you didn't? make em look foolish from the inside I don't think they need our help with that, they seem quite capable of making them selves look like complete dicks all on their own. Perhaps we should point out to the general gardeners examples like Opuntia - 200 plus species, maybe 2 dozen are weeds and even then not in all shires, but even though ony a few are weedy all but O ficus indica are noxious in most states. Cabomba spp, most states have all species are noxious but only 3 spp are genuine weeds, the rest are next to impossible to keep alive. The Gov finds it much easier to make nice short "clean lists" that they can ID the few species on it rather try to train their staff to ID the thousands of banned plants. It puts the onus of proof on us instead of them having to prove guilt. It seems be the same with the smuggling component of this legislation, it appears that if you cant prove where you got a plant (dob in your trade partners)you would automatically guilty of smuggling. This kind of presumption of guilt is very popular at present as its huge money & time saver since it requires the defendant to prove his/her innocence, freeing up investigators time. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ballzac Posted January 26, 2011 Wearing a sprig of wattle on Australia Day could land you in jail under new drug laws being proposed by the Federal Government. A discussion paper released by the Attorney-General's Department has called for the banning of plants that contain mescaline and DMT. The sweeping changes would outlaw the wattle our national flower and ban most types of ornamental cacti. The reason for the changes is the Federal Government's concern that drug users are using the internet and social media sites to get around drug laws by turning large-scale plant cultivation into illicit street drugs. James Pitts, CEO of drug rehabilitation centre Odyssey House McGrath Foundation, called the attempted ban an over-reaction. ``There are probably a lot of flora in the world, certainly used for medicinal purposes, that have psychotropic properties,'' he said. Pitts believes that sharing this information on social media is part of a broader trend. ``Look at the drug meow meow it was derived from a plant and had similar properties to amphetamines. ``There was lots of hype, it got a run for a while and has now subsided.'' A spokesman for the Attorney-General's Department said the plants were currently still legal. ``However, under the proposed controlled plants in Schedule II of the model schedules, plants containing DMT or mescaline could be captured,'' he said. Source: http://news.reportlinker.com/n05082656/Wattle-be-next-Sweeping-drug-law-changes-planned.html# Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rogdog Posted January 26, 2011 (edited) Maybe a good spanner in the works for whoever our spokeperson is, is to recommend that the proposed new legislation goes to a referendum, seeing as the new legislation would outlaw our national floral emblem. Past experience shows that most referendums fall over unless the majority of people see a very good reason to make a change. I have looked at the links in this thread, and I can't find exactly which plants are proposed to be prohibited, but others in this thread are suggesting that Acacia pycnantha is on the list. Also no more blackwood furniture if A. melanoxylon is prohibited etc. edit. nevermind, T explains in about three more posts Edited January 26, 2011 by rogdog Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ballzac Posted January 26, 2011 I can't find exactly which plants are proposed to be prohibited There is no definitive list, and this is part of the problem. All DMT containing plants would become illegal, and this could - after future research - include a whole host of plants that are currently not known to contain DMT. How on Earth are we meant to know which plants we are allowed to grow? Would plants in question be tested regardless of species to ascertain guilt? Or would there be a list that is kept somewhere that would grow as new information becomes available? How would a cactus nursery know which plants it can no longer grow and sell? Some are well known to contain Mescaline, but what about, for example, many species of Echinopsis that may contain mescaline? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darklight Posted January 26, 2011 Check this out: http://www.northernstar.com.au/story/2011/01/26/outcry-over-ban-talk-wattle-floral-emblem/ It begins! The Northern Star is pretty much a crap paper, but they even managed to get it right and keep the story in focus. I'm laughing hard for so many reasons :D A spokeswoman for the Minister said claims that backyard plants would be banned or their growers prosecuted were ‘ridiculous' Ah, the Feds are trying to get us used to having our federal laws selectively enforced. That's a slippery slope she's pushing Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hutch Posted January 26, 2011 Check this out: http://www.northerns...-floral-emblem/ It begins! The Northern Star is pretty much a crap paper, but they even managed to get it right and keep the story in focus. I'm laughing hard for so many reasons :D A spokeswoman for the Minister said claims that backyard plants would be banned or their growers prosecuted were 'ridiculous' Ah, the Feds are trying to get us used to having our federal laws selectively enforced. That's a slippery slope she's pushing I spoke with a mate today who also claims to have read that or a similar article in his local paper in the Lockyer Valley...It works cause he said to me. " your over reacting, it is only for large quantities"..They may be ramping up their own campaign in earnest.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mac Posted January 26, 2011 (edited) They could just keep adding to this so called list of plants What about passion-fruit etc dosnt that contain a Harmala alkaloid Will they add Caryophyllene containing plants because they activate the CB2 receptor & that cant be good Edited January 26, 2011 by mac Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Torsten Posted January 26, 2011 I was wrong. It appears that the spokeswoman is indeed for real. However she obviously doesn't understand the legislation, cos according to her it would be that small time cannabis growers won't be of interest to the fed either, cos apparently these laws only apply to commercial growers. Maybe we should clarify that point with her The spokesman however seems to have a better handle on things. I think we should go after the department and the spokeswoman for making false statements to the public. And just to clarify, Acacia pycnantha which is the national flower does NOT contain DMT. However, Wattle flowers are generally regarded as our national emblem and most people don't care about what species, so it is best to refer to wattles in general as the emblem under threat. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WoodDragon Posted January 26, 2011 (edited) Darklight. I'm pleased to see such a relatively balanced piece as the first article in the mainstream media. I winced at the word "sinister" - "medicinal" is the appropriate term for the work that SCU do - and daturas are thorn apples, not angels trumpets, but otherwise it was good enough that the reporter deserves a thumbs up. This is comment-worthy: The spokeswoman did not respond to questions regarding the health and crime impacts of DMT and mescaline, and their relative social costs compared with tobacco and alcohol. Says it all, doesn't it? I'm still struggling to believe that a genuine spokesperson for the minister can misrepresent the implications of the proposal as was done on GetUp!, but if she was genuine then I am not surprised that she refused to answer the questions about the actual health and criminal costs - or rather, the lack thereof - of acacias, cacti, brugs, khat, ans so on. Edited January 26, 2011 by WoodDragon 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yeti101 Posted January 26, 2011 From the Tips & Rumours section of Crikey's Daily Mail on Jan 21: Are you hording illegal wattle? The AG's office is calling for public submissions into its consultation on model drug schedules for Commonwealth serious drug offences. This will include expanding the list of plants illegal to grow in Australia. It will make hundreds of plant species -- native and non-native -- illegal to grow in Australia, even many wattles due to their DMT content (an hallucinogenic drug).It is quite mind boggling -- potentially tens of thousands of Australians with wattles, cacti, brugmansia, datura growing in their garden will become potential criminals. I am guessing our police will have to take crash courses in botanical taxonomy now. I imagine the biggest loser in this will be Bunnings as, based on the AG's argument, they are a criminal organisation who threaten our national security. I sense that this is gathering momentum Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ballzac Posted January 26, 2011 I sense that this is gathering momentum It seems to have started out mostly on the right foot too Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tripsis Posted January 26, 2011 Gaining momentum indeed, it's the only way to describe it. It's really quite amazing how fast people and the media are catching on to this. It's satisfying to see that so far the media is taking this from the right angle. It really is surprsising that a spokesperson for the goverment seems to have as little grasp as she does about why so many people are outraged as these proposed changes. Government ineptitude shining through once again. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ballzac Posted January 27, 2011 I've been so caught up in the plant side of things that I hadn't really taken notice of what substances are listed under controlled drugs/precursors until someone mentioned on getup that hydrogen chloride and phosphorus are listed. Is this for real? Acetaldehyde is listed as a precursor. Does that mean that shit beer would be illegal? The current list of precursors (section 314.3 of the criminal code) is small and contain things that look to be mostly, well, precursors. The proposed list contains so many common chemicals. Most laboratories, including high school chem labs, would not be able to operate without a permit, if they exist. A thermometer probably contains a marketable quantity of mercury. Hydrogen fuel cells? Sparklers (magnesium)? Wedding rings (platinum)? wtf???? Attachment 1 has a column for commercial intent. When it says 'no', does this mean that commercial intent is not required for presumption of guilt? For importation, it is 'yes' for small quantities, 'no' for large, so that would make sense, but it seems the other way around in Part IV (p.14) where it says that possession offences for precursors require intent. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
7baz Posted January 27, 2011 read this today... Wearing a sprig of wattle on Australia Day in future could land you in jail under new drug laws being proposed by the Federal Government. A discussion paper released by the Attorney-General's department has called for the banning of all plants that contain mescaline and dimethyltryptamine (DMT), a naturally occurring hallucinogenic compound. The sweeping changes would outlaw the wattle our national flower and ban most types of ornamental cacti. The reason for the changes is the Federal Government's concern that drug users are using the internet and social media sites to get around drug laws to turn garden plants into illicit street drugs. Queensland Alcohol and Drug Research and Education Centre director, Dr Jake Najman, said the changes would not make a dent in the number of Australians doing drugs. ``The amount of people using DMT or mescaline is absolutely trivial, according to our surveys,'' he said. ``There is a legitimate concern that drug users are using the internet to share information, but there are very few people who actually make drugs out of plants when alcohol, cannabis and ecstasy are so readily available.'' The discussion paper says that those caught cultivating ``commercial quantities'' or selling controlled plants could face between 10 years' jail and life imprisonment. Possessing plant material, equipment or instructions for commercial cultivation of controlled plants could earn you seven years in jail, which is five years more than for possession of a controlled drug. A spokesman for the Attorney-General's department said the plants were still legal. ``However under the proposed controlled plants in Schedule II of the model schedules, plants containing DMT or mescaline could be captured,'' he said. The spokesman refused to answer what amount of wattle constituted a commercial quantity. It is believed botanists will be exempt from the proposed changes. © 2011 News Ltd. this has to be insane right ? like most of us in here and many people of all walks of life for thousands of years.. we believe trees , plants hold a purpose for our existence. for us to explore , discover , enjoy or how ever you wish to term this. are we really to believe a bunch of cocksuckers in suits are to tell us what we can and cannot have ? this world is getting into a sorry state. i see a revolution coming on if they keep this shit up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shortly Posted January 27, 2011 Me thinks they are getting rattled The Gov seems to believe that evil internet social network sites & forums are the new frontier of the drug war. & since there are no "Mr bigs" to target, it would appear they have decided to go after the plants themselves. After all if there was no drug war the would be entire departments that would be obsolete, hundreds of staff with nothing to do. Funding would dry up nooooooooooooooooooooooo I wonder how many innocent voters this will actually affect directly & indirectly? That would be an interesting statistic to put to the minister. The Dept can propose anything they like but at the end of the day it will only get voted up if the Gov of the day is game, if its likely to cost them too many votes its just a waste of time & paper. In the meantime is it looking like getup are interested or are they staunch "anti-drug" supporters? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
klip247 Posted January 27, 2011 Ill say it again... this is absolutely ridiculous. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
naja naja Posted January 27, 2011 I like the way this is heading. I bet they were expecting to slip this through without a single public comment. The evilness of this government is astounding. Can we really trust them anymore? What is the legal avenue for having our parliment disbarred? They certainly deserve it. To those who proposed this and to those who support it.. I am a hardworking, tax paying citizen of this wonderfull country. You should be ashamed of yourself as a member of the human race. You are no better than the witch hunters from history. If there is a god, you can bet he will reap the greatest vengance upon YOU. This is genocide. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hutch Posted January 27, 2011 I like the way this is heading. I bet they were expecting to slip this through without a single public comment. The evilness of this government is astounding. Can we really trust them anymore? What is the legal avenue for having our parliment disbarred? They certainly deserve it. To those who proposed this and to those who support it.. I am a hardworking, tax paying citizen of this wonderfull country. You should be ashamed of yourself as a member of the human race. You are no better than the witch hunters from history. If there is a god, you can bet he will reap the greatest vengance upon YOU. This is genocide. Well it apparently all started with a speech from Kevin Rudd on organized crime in 2007...Don't wait for god...I think this might be giving them a fright or at least a little bit of heart burn....lets keep up the pressure...Stupid people 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
synchromesh Posted January 27, 2011 Just posting some links again... Australian Network of Environmental Defender's Offices Botanic Gardens Australia and New Zealand Inc Australian Conservation Foundation Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities Nursery and Garden Industry Australia Australian Native Plants Society Australian Native Plant Nurseries Native Growth Holdings Australian Native Plants Nursery Nurseries Online Banksia Environmental Foundation Biological Farmers of Australia Australian Farmers' Market Association Organic Federation of Australia Willing Workers On Organic Farms (WWOOF) Eco Farms The Wilderness Society Greening Australia Landcare Australia Limited The Greens Australian Wildlife Conservancy Permaculture Research Institute of Australia Australasian Mycological Society Landline Gardening Australia Gardening Australia Magazine Burke's Backyard Costa's Garden Odyssey Sustainable Gardening Australia Gardening Central The Food Forest Green Harvest Green Living Australia John Butler Trio Crikey New Internationalist Natural News Indymedia Online Opinion The Petition Site Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
qualia Posted January 28, 2011 heres a list of submissions i think are related to the current proposal http://www.nationaldrugstrategy.gov.au/internet/drugstrategy/publishing.nsf/Content/NDSSubmissionsReceived i haven't read through them all yet though Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
qualia Posted January 28, 2011 (edited) and some stats about drug use in australia taken from 2004, mentions just the usual suspects i.e. weed, meth, ecstasy, booze, cigarettes, http://www.aihw.gov.au/publications/index.cfm/title/10143 simply no reported use of dmt, mescaline, datura, or anything else on the new list may help with your submissions to fire some stats at them.. [edit]sorry, forgot the link...[/edit] [edit edit]2007 stats, probably more relevant, essentially the same thing[/edit edit] http://www.aihw.gov.au/publications/phe/ndshs07-fr/ndshs07-fr-no-questionnaire.pdf Edited January 28, 2011 by qualia Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ballzac Posted January 28, 2011 qualia, It might be more efficient to provide references when mentioning things like this so that anyone who wishes to use the statistics in their own submission does not have to go looking for the reference themselves. Cheers Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
