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

[synchromesh]

We have just taken an interest in politics because they may threaten some of our current freedoms... I don't recall anyone becoming too concerned around here with the new midwifery laws basically making cranking out a baby at home illegal, or at least ridiculously expensive. Anyone checked that out?

 

That actually came in? WTF?

In the seventeenth century, Dutchman Adrien Van der Donck described a woman’s preparation for childbirth among the Mohawk and Mahican Indians in what is now known as New York. He stated that pregnant women would “depart alone to a secluded place near a brook, or stream of water . . . and prepare a shelter for themselves with mats and coverings, where, provided with provisions necessary for them, they await their delivery without the company or aid of any person. . . . They rarely are sick from child-birth [and] suffer no inconveniences from the same.” Many similar descriptions of solitary, painless births exist among European observers of the Native Americans, but because most of these observers were men, and men rarely attended the birth of children, these descriptions are probably inaccurate. Although each indigenous culture had its own unique beliefs and rituals about childbirth, scholars believe that many First Peoples shared certain practices involving the participation of close family members and select others within the community.

http://teachinghistory.org/history-content/ask-a-historian/24097

[mescalito]

.

Edited March 4, 2011 by mescalito

[mescalito]

.

Edited March 4, 2011 by mescalito

[PD.]

Mary Jane is Illegal,last I heard you can easily get plenty still.

True but she grows a hell of a lot faster than a cactus for example and ppl tend to use pot on a daily basis if they smoke it. If ppl used such things as sally on a daily basis im sure there would be a lot more of it around due to the demand and financial advantage gained by those selling it illegally. Basic supply and demand, its pretty obvious.

[mescalito]

.

Edited March 4, 2011 by mescalito

[tripsis]

Mesc, is any of what you said something I'm supposed to respond to? I find your style of writing hard to follow.

Mary Jane is Illegal,last I heard you can easily get plenty still.

That's irrelevant. This is not about being having access to drugs, this is about having the right to grow plants. If you grow weed, you'll get a much heavier conviction than if you are caught with some buds in your possession. Seeing as most of us here grow the plants which are being targetted, we could expect to cop pretty heavy convictions just for doing what is presently legal. But of course it goes much deeper than that. The plants are just the surface. It is the very fact that simple rights are potentially being taken away from us, turning massive numbers of Australians into criminals, eroding our liberties bit by bit.

[mescalito]

Well you must have got the same email i.e. a carbon copy as I guess some others did?

Where you asked not to say ANYTHING like I was?

Ummm yeah my vision is blurry and I keep losing track and correcting double keying,as I'm being bombarded with the symptoms of Xanax withdrawal right now.

I am quite a wordsmith under the right circumstances and have written my own way out of trouble many many times.I used to proof-read before the med's.

As for the weed,well someone has to grow it,it doesn't come in a can.I was comparing it to Salvia as mentioned in the email and above...ummm brain fog setting in.

The Jail system is already full of MJ traffickers,so where are they going to put ALL of us?,not just forum members.....think boy think!

I need some fresh air now and meditate before my next dose of "crack".

I just see things that don't add up and ask why.

That's all.

Edited March 3, 2011 by mescalito

[kindness]

That actually came in? WTF?

 

I believe it is still kinda up in the air, but at the moment it stands that a mid-wife cannot get insurance for their work... thus to do a home birth and have something terrible happen... well the midwife wears it, possibly then able to be charged with murder,(?). I could be wrong on the last bit about being charged but yeah, the insurance thing is in operation. I don't want to drift off topic too much here.. we and plenty others I know had their babes at home, we have got by just fine thank you very much for many thousands of years before pathologizing pregnancy and birth ugh.. living in a patriarchal disempowering culture much?

Come up to the nursery one day and see for yourself what it supports. The profit we make from online sales is EXACTLY one full time wage. I think you will find the same for all the other plant sellers too. The plants at best pay for their keeper's wage and that's it. But I am not the keeper. Come and meet the staff that are happy and passionate about what they do, but also need to feed their families. To me it would make no difference if we shut the nursery down tomorrow, except for the plant trading opportunities it provides.

I've been saying this for years..... pretty much ever since we started: It is actually the herb products side of the business that makes the profit, so essentially we'd be better off without the nursery [and it is something we constantly have to questions ourselves about].

I've already discussed with our staff what the impact of the laws would be if they were passed, as they are obviously worried about how this would affect their jobs. I think it would cut our NURSERY turnover by about 50% [ie total turnover less than 25%]. At that point we'd really need to reconsider if it is worth keeping going as the scale of economies would drive up the cost and the nursery would become an even greater burden on the business. The other option is to simply adapt, which is something we have always done. There are always more interesting plants. We also have a huge orchid collection here so we might just diversify into that. or palms. or fruit.

Because it is of little consequence to our finances I am just not concerned about it and won't worry about changes until they are upon us.

As for the laws, I am fighting them because I've spent the last 10 years planting the plants that are on the target list. I'd hate to have to pull them all out. We are on clay soil here and it takes a lot to get each plant growing. the loss in both financial terms and emotionally would be phenomenal.

Man, firstly I gotta say that I was drinking alcohol last night when I made that post and got up this morning think, 'oh god dude what did you write on the forums last night..' I have actually been a bit reluctant to come on and see what text carnage I've caused... anyhow.. I don't think you are a capitalist pig feeding off a bunch of people interested in plants... you have helped this hobby / way of life to develop in Australia through the great work you do and for that I personally thank you.

I will be visiting Wandjina at some stage and know the solid work that is put in at the gardens. I could not imagine the heartache your main worker at the gardens would feel watching the care, energy and sharing, (that I know they have experienced through working with the plants) have to be destroyed. I don't want to imagine that because I think we have the power as people to stop this going ahead. I know the family that Wandjina supports, well, I don't know how I come across online cause it is such a strange method of communication... but if you want to or feel like it ask your nursery manager about me sometime

@ Mesc, thankyou for this, "Same dude,express what you feel and don't be discouraged when you get no response....you just may have hit a nerve " I seem to be being a bit of a needy little whiner at the moment... this too shall pass lol. I have appriciated your input into this discussion. I will be diving into the water to save the babies floating past, I just hope that someone else somewhere is thinking about the bigger picture in terms of removing our rights as human flesh and bone beings. I actually know that there are people out there who devote their existence to empowering the dis-empowered both through direct help with individuals to national and globally through policy development. I just hope that our gradual drift towards living in a total police state is being noticed!

It feels to me like our rights to various freedoms of choice are being removed one by bloody one and in such a way as to not really be noticed... frog in a pot of boiling water sort of scenario. Anyhow, if it gets to it I will certainly be protesting for my rights to grow plants... bugger it. Even if it does nothing to change the laws at least someone somewhere out there might think that our current leadership / government stinks for not listening to the people protesting.

like what tripsis said too. I'm scared of what is happening to this country. All it takes is a little cheap flight over to NZ to see what a country that relies more on their citizens sense of decency and respect for each other in order to keep things ticking along is like. The cops don't carry guns, you can drive off from the cops if they want you to pull over three times before you even have to go to court? I feel like we are being mis-treated by our laws and government. They do some good stuff for sure, but they have also somehow created communities of people that behave like abused dogs, whimpering in the corner, afraid of everyone and everything.

out. rant over. not alcohol induced lol

[tripsis]

Well you must have got the same email i.e. a carbon copy as I guess some others did?

No, I didn't get email asking me to be quiet Mesc.

As for the weed,well someone has to grow it,it doesn't come in a can.

Yeah, but there's a difference. Those who grow weed generally do so for profit and take a calculated risk. At the moment, the plants we grow are legal. Personally, I grow them for the love of it and for the love of the plants. If they were to become illegal, there would be no benefit for me to grow these plants, except for the emotional benefit, which would not make it worth the risk of being thrown in gaol. I would imagine very few people grow weed for the love of it, without either selling the end product or using it themselves, yet I would say many people on this forum grow plants they have no intention of using or selling.

Edit:

All it takes is a little cheap flight over to NZ to see what a country that relies more on their citizens sense of decency and respect for each other in order to keep things ticking along is like. The cops don't carry guns, you can drive off from the cops if they want you to pull over three times before you even have to go to court? I feel like we are being mis-treated by our laws and government. They do some good stuff for sure, but they have also somehow created communities of people that behave like abused dogs, whimpering in the corner, afraid of everyone and everything.

I must say from my recent trip to NZ, it really is glaringly apparent how much better NZ is than here, in terms of culture, government and their environmental policies.

Edit 2: typos

Edited March 3, 2011 by tripsis

[solomon]

I must say from my recent trip to NZ, it really is glaringly apparent how much better NZ is than here, in terms of culture, government and their environmental policies.

 

I hear what your saying, but it won't be for long if the National party stays in power here..

[PD.]

Come on PD people don't eat cactus everyday if at all and Sally is easily obtainable still!

There is a black market for it and people do sell it.

ummm yep, I think youll hafta explain what you mean in both posts mesc, ya lost me mate

Mary Jane is Illegal,last I heard you can easily get plenty still.

Something smells funny.

I took that^ to say that if cactus etc become illegal it doesnt matter as it would still be obtainable and commonplace like weed.

[synchromesh]

Aren't the 60's enough evidence that protests can succeed?

[WoodDragon]

Heads up, everyone.

There is an episode of the ABC's Australia Talks scheduled for next Wednesday, 9 March, with the running title of "Banned plants". For those who aren't familiar with the program, it's an hour-long talk-back on Radio National that is broadcast nation-wide. It's on at 6:00 pm in Eastern Australia - other time zones should check their local timetables. It's also broadcast live on the internet.

Australia Talks samples from the comments that are posted to its site, to read out during the show, and they will have two or three guest interviewees, as well as receiving calls from all around Australia. Their guests are likely to represent both pro and con, and it's quite possible that the con side will try to pull the wool over the listeners' eyes.

This is a good 11th-hour chance to get the message across, and if there's anyone who is media-savvy and clued-in on the matter, I beseech them to call in and be heard on-air. If possible, tell the producer if you're in any way 'expert', and perhaps ask to be held back a bit in the queue so that you can address any nonsense that is bound to come up. I've spoken on this program in the past, and the producer will try to get a handle on what you want to say before putting you on, so you get the chance to convince them that you're worth putting on the queue at all. People outside of the Eastern time zone can call in "live time" if they call the number 1300 22 55 76 (1300 CALL RN) during the AEST 6:00 - 7:00 pm period.

If you're not confident with the idea of speaking live to tens of thousands of Australians (and foreigners) at once, it would be better just to listen and leave it to the more eloquent folk to put our case forward. And for anyone who talks, be aware that if you ramble or go off-topic you'll be quickly canned. The idea is to make quick, important, and focussed points, and to do so in a fluent and interesting way. The more expert and relevant you sound, the longer you'll get. Don't labour on any one point - you'll be gonged - but make sure that each point you make is clear and self-evident. Usually they only give people one point or about 30 second's worth, whichever comes first, but with a bit of finesse it's possible to get a few points across.

A good strategy if you're not familiar with the program is to listen to a few other episodes first, to get an idea of how it runs. If you don't think that you can get everything across in your own effort, coordinate with others and divide up a list of points to make. In this case, best to share the list and tick off points as they are made, because repeating a point is a sure way to be quickly gonged - unless you say something to the effect that before you make your point you just want to agree with what so-an-so said.

So, the loquatious amongst us should think about calling, and the rest of us should be posting on their comments page (see the web page) as politely as we can and with as much detail as we are able to muster. Do it sooner rather than later, so that the regular ABC listeners and readers of the site can get an idea of the consequences. I'll post, but unfortunately I'll be at a seminar during the live broadcast.

This is a big chance to be heard across a wide section of Australia, and to get people to make IMMEDIATE submissions to the government - be sure to include http://www.gardenfreedom.com in your posts on the comments page.

Edited March 3, 2011 by WoodDragon

[tripsis]

Thanks for the heads up WD. Will definitely try to have a listen. Good to see this subject is getting some more coverage.

[qualia]

do they stream live over the web at all?

i don't have radio

could someone set their tape recorder to "record"?

it'd be cool to have the show on file in case any one misses it,

[tripsis]

It's also broadcast live on the internet.

[qualia]

haha, shit

[WoodDragon]

Qualia, it'll also be downloadable from the internet the day after it's broadcast. Just watch the linked page, and it should appear on Thursday.

If not, check their archives.

Edited March 3, 2011 by WoodDragon

[WoodDragon]

Just found the guest list:

Guests

Dr Anthony Kachenko

National Environmental & Technical Policy Manager Nursery and Garden Industry Australia

Peter Mouatt

Research Associate in Plant Science, Southern Cross University

Ian Leader-Elliott

Adjunct Professor of Law University of South Australia

Dr Philip Kerr

Lecturer in Medicinal Chemistry, School of Biomedical Sciences, Charles Sturt University

There are also links below the list, for anyone who's curious.

[Torsten]

I was sent an email with this exact wording asking me to stop spreading negativity!!!

AND NOT TO TELL ANYONE!.....so wassup?!!!

 

I asked you [and only you] not to spread the negativity you are experiencing from your withdrawals into this thread. I asked you that respectfully and I offered you good reasons in return which I asked you to keep to yourself.

Don't worry, I won't be trusting you again.

[Torsten]

Just found the guest list:

 

Pity, Peter Moautt is bound to screw up the legal details again and will make the whole thing look ridiculous when faced with a law professor. I hope the law prof is on our side or this discussion will go badly.

[J Smith]

Heads up, everyone.

There is an episode of the ABC's Australia Talks scheduled for next Wednesday, 9 March, with the running title of "Banned plants". For those who aren't familiar with the program, it's an hour-long talk-back on Radio National that is broadcast nation-wide. It's on at 6:00 pm in Eastern Australia - other time zones should check their local timetables. It's also broadcast live on the internet.

Australia Talks samples from the comments that are posted to its site, to read out during the show, and they will have two or three guest interviewees, as well as receiving calls from all around Australia. Their guests are likely to represent both pro and con, and it's quite possible that the con side will try to pull the wool over the listeners' eyes.

 

Hi Woody, aren't we on the con side? I'm certainly not pro banning plants!

[kindness]

any ethnobotanists among us that could represent clear, cited examples of why the continued study of plants is important, (among other points)?

[WoodDragon]

MHV.

I meant pro plants!

[Torsten]

any ethnobotanists among us that could represent clear, cited examples of why the continued study of plants is important, (among other points)?

 

peter who is on the panel is very suited to that. My criticism above was only about the legal aspect of it.