endorfinder Posted April 20, 2013 So this really is a law that they can choose who and when to enforce it on. Thats the worst thing ever. THANK YOU. Someone gets it As I said it is a profiling law. This is reeks of the joe years, it's scary shit. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
poisonshroom Posted April 21, 2013 I dont want to live in this state any more =[ 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scarecrow Posted April 21, 2013 So this really is a law that they can choose who and when to enforce it on. Thats the worst thing ever. yeah basically this ^ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bigred Posted April 21, 2013 (edited) Our only option is to get a big property and do what west Virginia did during the war. So we must secede from the Qld government and the monarchy as i want no part of this which may later be seen as a war crime. We can print our own money have our own reserve and live in a utopia it will be like north korea but fun. Edited April 21, 2013 by bigred82 8 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
endorfinder Posted April 21, 2013 For many decades there have been people talking about creating a new state from the tropic of capricorn upwards... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
endorfinder Posted April 21, 2013 haha and north korea sounds like it was a ball, just not for 99% of the population ;) 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shortly Posted April 21, 2013 haha and north korea sounds like it was a ball, just not for 99% of the population ;) Thats starting to sound like queensland, beautiful one day shafted the next. 5 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mycot Posted April 22, 2013 Bigred, go easy on whatever it is that you are on. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bigred Posted April 22, 2013 Bigred, go easy on whatever it is that you are on. Its my new girl friend she makes me feel so young .Makes me want to take over the world SKEET SKEET SKEET This law is a joke whats happening to our state . The whole "war on drugs" is a losing and expensive problem. They cant even afford to fix the pot holes on our roads. But they can afford to kick in some working class hero's door and bust him for a bit of weed . those pricks should be out there filling pot holes not kicking in doors . Did you know pot holes have killed a LOT of people. Weed on the other hand has killed none and just made bike gangs in our state rich. which is the bigger threat to human life cannabis or pot holes.. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shortly Posted April 22, 2013 Does anyone have a link to where the changes to the analogue clause of the drugs misuse act has been gazetted? I've been looking in legislation.qld.gov.au/OQPChome.htm but that hasnt been updated since 20 March, 2013 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thelema Posted April 23, 2013 I really don't see the big deal with this added clause. Such a provision was covered under the criminal case law anyway, wasn't it? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Torsten Posted April 24, 2013 I really don't see the big deal with this added clause. Such a provision was covered under the criminal case law anyway, wasn't it? no. you might be confusing it with misrepresentation. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thelema Posted April 27, 2013 Misrepresentation carries a bigger penalty in QLD or is this the bigger misdemeanour? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Torsten Posted April 28, 2013 representing a substance as a drug gets the same penalty as if it was the drug. The difference with the new law is that even if you state that this is NOT the drug, but 'feels like' it then you can be prosecuted as if it was that drug. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thelema Posted April 28, 2013 (edited) I don't see the problem. Isn't a good thing that things are peddled on their own pharmacological merit? I can't recall the last time I saw a substance as marketed as having a similar effect to [insert banned drug here]. It's not such a shame or burden to any industry I can think of. Who would be so dumb to explicitly declare that the substance they are selling to you is intended by them to have a similar pharmacological effect to a banned drug? Who cares?? It's a non-issue. However, I do take issue with the previous clause about being similar in pharmacological effect. But that is not the point of this thread, which is about the new clause inserting intentionality. Edited April 28, 2013 by Thelema Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Torsten Posted May 1, 2013 I agree. I don't really care about the naming thing. It can get a little difficult though if someone asks you about a product and what it might be like. eg, if a new cannabis-like product hits the market it would need to be described as sedating, trippy, spacey, etc, but you could never just say 'a bit like pot', or 'very much like cannabis'. My main beef is with the pharmacological similarity. I was OK with them separating out structure from effect, but to make effect a standalone offence is ridiculous. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bigred Posted May 5, 2013 The tyranny of be ruled by the monarchy . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shortly Posted May 6, 2013 (edited) More like the tyranny of being ruled by society, as opposed to community which fewer & fewer places & groups seem to have retained. Edited May 6, 2013 by shortly 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thelema Posted May 8, 2013 it really needs to be clarified what they mean by "effect" or "pharmacologically similar effect". Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cactuscarl Posted May 8, 2013 I think the best course of action here would be someone who is way more articulate and well spoken than me write up a list of everything that has just become (theoretically) illegal like saffron cheese wattles brugmania milk ect ect ect. and send it to every news agency in the country one would have to run with it. Add to that list the industries affected by the change. The ignorance and stupidity here is astounding and I think if it is written well with some science and chemistry to back it up we could get a couple of articles printed Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
