41 replies to this topic

[Marcel]

All fun and games until some kids goes and orders a tonne of MHRB because the knowledgeable fellow on the internet said it was ok...

If we're all about the facts here, perhaps you should suggest how much in legal fees one would have to shell out to take this to the level of being dismissed as an "illegal law" and therefore not applicable to you, me and anyone else who earns less than $1 M a year and can't afford a criminal record.

[Torsten]

This forum is about real world application of law. if you show me a case where the defendant won on the basis of what you are sayign then I am willing to entertain your concept. otherwise your comments will be deleted because they are dangerous and misleading. I know it has been a wile, but here is the periodic warning that any members trolling legal threads with theoretical freeman and constitutional concepts will be barred from this subforum. You have a couple of threads to discuss this in, so keep it out of the ones where it might cause serious damage to individuals. Even if your concept was valid, most individuals here do nto have the $100,000 or so that is needed to start a high court challenge.

as for your comment that the constitution overrides the state acts, I think you need to look again. the constitution only overrides federal and territory law. State law is not affected in most cases. That's why constitutional challnges about state drug law do not get heard.

[ghosty]

too many bonehead laws concern plants in this ..... country. making plants illegal is just an act of a retard! where else but australia? Jokes, i think its all good, i mean, life is much easier when the government does the thinking and decides on matters for me. hahhahhahha. australia... rolls eyes

[at0m]

too many bonehead laws concern plants in this ..... country. making plants illegal is just an act of a retard! where else but australia? Jokes, i think its all good, i mean, life is much easier when the government does the thinking and decides on matters for me. hahhahhahha. australia... rolls eyes

In most places, cannabis is illegal - that's a plant
It's not only Australia but ours is pretty bad - especially if that thing they were talking about awhile ago materialises.

[Ethos]

It could just be that Australia's strict custom regulation are really in place to protect us, I know I wouldn't like it if someone imported bark illegaly and then unknowingly introduced some wood borring mite or pest that posed a threat to all our trees and wildlife.

[shortly]

There are 2 separate issues issues with this Ethos,
Customs would be interested in MHRB as a terribly dangerous drug that would most likely destroy the fabric of polite Australian society, but customs wouldn't give a rats ass about any bugs.
Quarantine on the other hand are supposed to get excited about bark for fungal diseases & bugs. Although i dunno how excited they really get since they have relaxed their stance on that, apparently because it was costing industry too much money.

AQIS facilitating international trade. It used to be "AQIS protecting Australia" but i guess reducing costs for business is more important.
http://www.daff.gov....ort/timber/bark

[7baz]

This forum is about real world application of law. if you show me a case where the defendant won on the basis of what you are sayign then I am willing to entertain your concept. otherwise your comments will be deleted because they are dangerous and misleading. I know it has been a wile, but here is the periodic warning that any members trolling legal threads with theoretical freeman and constitutional concepts will be barred from this subforum. You have a couple of threads to discuss this in, so keep it out of the ones where it might cause serious damage to individuals. Even if your concept was valid, most individuals here do nto have the $100,000 or so that is needed to start a high court challenge.

as for your comment that the constitution overrides the state acts, I think you need to look again. the constitution only overrides federal and territory law. State law is not affected in most cases. That's why constitutional challnges about state drug law do not get heard.

section 109 : When a law of a State is inconsistent with a law of the Commonwealth, the latter shall prevail, and the former shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be invalid.


$100,000 for high court did you say ?

sorry wrong again , a new law was passed in 2004 , 25 years jail for any solicitor , judge , barrister , magistrate who commit the crime of costs orders , it falls under as slavery in the criminal code act section 268.10

​there not allowed to change u a cent for high court proceedings , rulings , charges , or what ever it may be .

man there is so many hidden rules they have kept people from knowing about.
its because they simply dont want people to know.

do you know why most people cannot use common law to defend themselves on drug charges ? 9 times out of 10 your denied bail. and there is a very good reason for this.... its because with bail refused and when you are taken to court.. guess where u get seated ? right up the ass of admirality law , law of the sea.. your in there jurisdiction and literally stuck there.

your royally screwed.
now if you were to be busted with say half a million dollars worth of pot and got bail and you were to go to court.. i can name personally 7 ways to get out of it... thats common law..... im starting to see it everywhere here in oz.

can i prove this ? yup

my friend jason whom many of you would have seen his " grass " plates on his car , after being pulled over more then 6 times , after 3 court appearances.. and yet they still have not managed to stop him , he still driving in his vehicle , no rego , no license and no insurance.

​actually the correct word is.. he is TRAVELING in his AUTOMOBILE.. he is not driving , because he is not engaged in commerce , it is not a vehicle as it is not used for commerce , it is a automobile.
its all about how you word everything.

my purpose of writting this is because the time has come to tell people the truth , they need to know the truth.

Edited by 7baz, 13 June 2012 - 08:56 AM.

[DreamTimeBliss]

Id love to hear more about your friend Jason.

[7baz]

dreamtimebliss i shall start a new thread sometime next week , i have my own custom made plates arriving any day now.
here is what they look like.

[elfwhisper]

This is not a thread for debate however I am supporting the DO NOT IMPORT any controlled substance (or mixture containing) as defined in state or federal law. Perhaps readers of the constitution might also like to peruse the Australia Act 1986 - 'enacted by the Queen'

[ghosty]

i agree on the dont import anything here. not worth dramas. i dont agree to ethos about the bugs as if that was the case, they could just fire it in their microwave and send it on its way. and i agree about the threat "they were talking about a while ago" that would be stupid yes. not to mention a crime against nature! on that note, what a huge undertaking LOL australia does make me laugh i must admit. i have seen various natives being removed by council round the place too. if thats te case, perhaps they will work with the mining companies. that way they could remove ALL the trees at the same time they profit from this total destruction.. that would make them smile (if they have enough neurons left to pull that emotion off)
=)
how else can they remove 80% of australian plants? hahha. there is no end to their utter madness! at least they dont try to hide it =P

[pete34]

those who make any plant illegal are tyrants
little brain pen pushers who think they know things but they TRULY live in conciousness poverty so know diddle eh eh

for example

to try and ban DMT shows how low a conciseness these people have,DMT is what they need more than most people
have you seen the list of DMT plants??
Aussie plants being common DMT Enthusiasts themselves eh eh
like oh lets ban DMT so now Acacias are a dangerous plant

bureaucrats are tested for certain character flaws, like some stock brokerages do
as they are yes men to banksters

to ban commercial hemp for fibres is another show of who they work for, it has no THC and the goods produced and benefits are immense but synthetic manufactures/banksters had it banned to make more sales

did you here the gov lent one of the boys 9 million to buy a farm and now the gov will pay 70 mill a year to grow scrub/carbon eh eh

carbon scam for banksters

we need a republic ASAP with a constitution like usa had

[ghosty]

toads are not frogs... well in figi they are =) i remember when i went there as a child. being autistic didnt help me as i went round killing them for fun (yes i was an interesting child haha) well, you should have heard the trouble that night stirred up around the Fiji people =P toads here but frogs there. as far as banning DMT plants goes, im told by the psuedo-people (.gov) that this would be to stop the sales of drugs that funds terror groups, thus making the world safer. well, anyone that "sells" drugs will tell you these compounds have NO street value. why? they dont bath the ego and people are scared by them. besides that, the only thing thing such laws will do is make the tree's in the bush dissapear. basically it will destroy bushlands and make animals who live on such foods drop in numbers, turn gardeners into criminals, and make australians not able to grow VERY attractive native plants in their own country! anyone who wanted to consume illegal compounds will still be able to do so, i mean most plants in australia contain trytamine alkaloids. try to take my garden plants... over my dead body.

[Jox]

Fiji is over run by the feral canetoad (they were introduced there too!!). Its just that the natives are so nice & so friendly they call them frogs.

[ghosty]

true ay? didnt know that, but it makes sense.

[waterboy]

In regards to the OP - just dont do it...

like most can you really do with the hassle?

[shortly]

Plenty of trees about locally if you care to hunt.

A bit off topic i know but is the purple dye made from the bark? or just the root bark?