Canvassing for Opinion - aka "Blairs Brain on Cannabis"

IMHO prohibition sentiment requires inherent addiction to status quo, an incapacity to visualise beyond the here and now and a desperate desire to know others might feel the same... Reform is not revolutionary, rather it is evolutionary. Having survived banging your head against a brick wall the evolutionist relishes having stopped. / Blair

Saturday, July 14, 2018

Dog problem or Dogone opportunity.

As long as Councils cow-tow to the notion that Dogs are 'a problem' rather than an asset with a highly significant economic and social dividend naysayers will bitch and moan. 

It is time that Council(s) up and down this country did their job properly and listened to the body of expertise.... easily musterable. 

Consider, 500,000 registered dogs, at about a 100 dollars a year isnt just a pool of money, it is a collective canine income backed by about half a billion dollars or more in purchasing power that warrants some 'investing' in knowledge and infrastructure.  Perhaps it is time for the Ministry of  Internal Affairs (the ultimate arbiter of dog policy in New Zealand) to step up and own the problem rather than this fractious, protracted and often ill-advised by 'animal control officers' approach. 

How about some advice, based on research and study from a rich body of 'other jurisdictions' where success informs policy.

We have to fix this because cities that are great for dogs are utterly excellent for people.

--
Blair Anderson 
Social Ecologist 'at large'
Christchurch, New Zealand
ph nz  (643) 389 4065   nz cell 027 265 7219
View blog reactions

Thursday, April 26, 2018

Afraid of due process?

http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2018/03/medical-cannabis-users-too-afraid-of-police-to-submit-on-bill.html

Blair Anderson http://mildgreens.blogspot.com
View blog reactions

Marijuana is Hashish (some kiwi reefer madness from 1939)

Marijuana (Cannabis sativa)
(Cannabis sativa)
Marijuana is Hashish
In the United States, the authorities are now seizing and destroying annually four hundred thousand tons of the illicit weed popularly known as marijuana.For the first time, American school children are now seriously menaced by the temptation of narcotics. Says the Commissioner of the U.S. Bureau of Narcotics: Children, homeward bound from school, are being introduced to a new danger to-day in the form of a drugged ' cigarette Marijuana. This weed is jeopardising American youth, making of those who become marijuana addicts irresponsible degenerates or criminals.' On street corners there has developed the refrain, “Do you want to be happy? Hey, kid! Do you want to be happy.’’ This voice must be stilled. In Ohio, a gang of seven youths under twenty recently (perpetrated thirty-eight stick-ups while operating “high’’ on marijuana. In New York City, an addicted inmate of the Tombs confessed that he had murdered a friend, and put his body in a trunk. In West Virginia, a young man was arrested for the rape of a nine-year-old girl while under the influence of marijuana. In Texas, a hitchhiker under the influence of marijuana murdered a motorist. In Florida, a marijuana victim butchered with an axe his father, sister and two brothers. In Michigan, a marijuana addict manacled a trooper to a mail post and put a bullet through his head. So grows the tale and tally of the latest peril for the youth of America. . Marijuana-drugged cigarettes are known colloquially under various names, such as reefers and muggles. They produce idiotic laughter and a temporary state of lunacy; if they become a habit they may bring on permanent insanity. Marijuana causes a feeling of exaltation and magnificent illusions regarding time and space. Eighty miles an hour may seem like twenty, or the victim may seem to be soaring above the clouds. Later come irresistible impulses to violence. Its effects are more unpredictable than those of opium. Fortunately, juries are ignoring the plea of “temporary insanity” and sending criminal addicts to prison. In New Orleans it is claimed that one out of four arrests can be attributed to marijuana smoking. This opiate, new to the United States, has been known to the Orient since the dawn of history. Its Illicit use spread to the U.S.A. from Mexico and, with it, the slang name marijuana—“ Mary and Jane.” It is derived from the leaves and fruit of the plant Cannabis sativa. For all its impressive Greek name. Cannabis sativa is nothing .other Rhan our common weed hemp, which grows high in almost any climate. Hashish is the most popular name for marijuana in the Near East, where hemp has been cultivated for centuries for the tough fibre made from its harmless stalk as well as for the narcotic resin and drugs derived from its leaves and flowering shoots and fruit. The insidious elixirs of Cannabis sativa have, since the beginning of the* Christian Era, contributed to keeping the once virile races of India, western Asia, Egypt, and northern Africa in a state of dreamy and innocuous desuetude. Like 'the opium-smoking Chinese they have become politically impotent. Apparently, the Arabs have at last
DRUGGED CIGARETTES
shaken off its lure, while the ascetic Japanese are content to sell narcotic drugs for profit to other peoples and live at home on rice and fish. Hashish is more provocative than opium. It excites the mind and brings on temporary insanity, thus leading to robbery, rape, and murder. The violence of its effects may be judged by the derivation of the English -word assassin. Assassin comes from an Arabic word meaning “one who has drunk of hashish.” The religious and military Order of the Assassins, founded in Persia in 1090, terrorized the Near East for centuries, destroying its enemies by secret murder-

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/BOPT19390601.2.56.6
BIBLIOGRAPHIC DETAILS
Marijuana is Hashish, Bay of Plenty Times, Volume LXVII, Issue 12757, 1 June 1939, 

Blair Anderson http://mildgreens.blogspot.com
View blog reactions

Sunday, April 08, 2018

Checkpoint 'fishing' nets a small bag of vegetables!

I found this article from nzherald.co.nz that you might be interested in: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/hawkes-bay-today/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503462&objectid=12027757

The MildGreens has a different, and perhaps instructive perpective.

Who exactly was offended?  (there indeed lies the lie!, absent a victim or complainant who would know what the social harm 'loss' was... especially as a Select Committee sits hearing just how damn beneficial cannabis is for countless thousands)  while Police continue the mythology, especially where their continued faith in their infamous BERL report is to be any indication of the claimed but never tested social burden. From that report it can be more fairly estimated the cost of this interdiction by 'fishing' cost about $20,000, what with police prosecutors saying this was at the 'high' end of serious offending and no doubt asking for jail time (x3), that legal aid (x3) was worth it all, oh, and court time, ESR reports, yadda yadda, grift, grift....  ain't it all being so terrible that someone was going to make money illegally on someones misery! 

So, Mr Policeman.... show us the actual photo of what you really found, it certainly wasn't a standing 'plantation' that, for joe cannabis consumer, looks more like highly desirable, greatly appreciated bud porn.

I can but only imagine how many good people this would have modestly recreated, or heaven forbid alleviated some ailment. 

Do these Police (apparently doing their jobs, but then so were the uniforms closing the padlocks on the carriages to Auschwitz) not understand that it just might be the law that is offensive and that it encourages, indeed incentivises entrepreneurial risk taking?  Or now, we have effectively destroyed the lives of three young men labelling them deviant 'forever and a day'. 

Twerps doesn't quite cut it.

Seriously, this Select Committee needs to understand, the right to possess, for whatever reason, cannabis is a barren right without the right to cultivate, process, store, transport, package and merchandise, exactly as prescribed in the law that Labour passed, by Order in Council in 2008

Google ( "Restricted Substances Regulations" 2008 ) - because no bloody journalist will.

View blog reactions

Friday, March 30, 2018

Time to Submit, Mr Key!

UNDP Ms. Helen Clark meeting with New Zealand ...
UNDP Ms. Helen Clark meeting with New Zealand Prime Minister John Key (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Prime Minister, UN Development and Sustainability, and all-around great lass, Rt. Hon Helen Clark on her retirement from the UN promptly joined the Global Drug Commision. Helen Clark served as New Zealand's Prime Minister when Labour's Caucus gazetted the "Restricted Substances Regulations" by Order in Council in 2008 prior to the Nation going to the polls. She lost the election, but the "Class D" crucial legal adjustment received royal assent the day John Key became Right and Honourable. Following the Synthetics Substances Sentencing Bill passing its first reading and going to select committee, 'Aunty Helen' chimed in "And I think all the people who know about drug policy, who know what's happening around the world, need to come to the [select] committee and spell it out how it is." This tells us a great deal about what her thinking was, and how that might have been the ball breaker at the UN for her to take the reigns.

It also informs the debate about prison muster and the Chief Science Advisor's advice that we have our Justice system arse about face. The MildGreens think tank has some insight no one seems to notice or weight. that it is not about how many beds, rather the 'prison churn' and the rate at which we criminalise our population that Gluckman et al have missed.

While it is good to have Helen on the case, it must not be forgotten that Labour spent a lot of time doing nothing before it magically came up with the idea (after hearing it at Select Committee) that we could create a better 'all drug policy' by Order in Council. And that 'we did' create the worlds best drug laws, now countered by NZ1 and National support in the house with its Private Members Bill tripling the sentencing guidelines to the yet to be used Psychoactive Substances Act notably created by those who would see its continuing failure as success.

Blair Anderson http://mildgreens.blogspot.com
View blog reactions

Wednesday, March 28, 2018

Labour Party Cannabis Inquiry Call, Twenty Years Old.

From the Floor.....  Twenty Years Ago
Deal with the Fax, Labour

Blair Anderson http://mildgreens.blogspot.com
View blog reactions

Police continue to warn 'emerging drug threats' - so what makes them harm redux experts again?



The greater risk of harm the less logical it is to hand over the quality control of 'emerging anything' to the black economy. It should be noted that, while all the people survived in spite of the risky nature of their experiential dalliance, these 'harms' occurred on the watch of prohibition. It is utterly predictable. History instructs us well. We banned BZP despite its high safety profile, and got, for our moral wowsering a raft of new entries, untested, untried and of highly variable potency. So to when they were banned, we get this 'new' threat. We know banning low alcohol beer lead to the whisky stills. The science and economics demonstrate quite clearly the banning and elevated enforcement of cannabis lead to elevated availability of methamphetamine. (google ICE and Pokalo). It amounts to policy, politics and police trying to rewrite the law of supply and demand. On this matter the Police are neither experts nor equipped to make reasoned argument despite purporting to have 'drug intelligence'. They are neither health professionals or scientists. Acceptance of this continuing demonisation of drug use, itself a recipe for failure, demonstrates a severe anomaly in civil discourse where those who are briefed to uphold the law also practise the making of it. It can be fairly said, and has been my senior judge's, that "cannabis is not criminogenic, whereas prohibition is!" - for that is where the conversation must start. Thankfully President Obama, even if belatedly, is now on the case. Our continued support for this 'locked in paradigm' will, in time, become nothing more than an embarrassment that we could be so stupid to believe doubling and redoubling our prohibition efforts will eventually make a positive difference. There comes a point where ceasing banging our collective heads against a brick wall becomes an evolutionary act.The greater risk of harm the less logical it is to hand over the quality control of 'emerging anything' to the black economy. It should be noted that, while all the people survived in spite of the risky nature of their experiential dalliance, these 'harms' occurred on the watch of prohibition. It is utterly predictable. History instructs us well. We banned BZP despite its high safety profile, and got, for our moral wowsering a raft of new entries, untested, untried and of highly variable potency. So to when they were banned, we get this 'new' threat. We know banning low alcohol beer lead to the whisky stills. The science and economics demonstrate quite clearly the banning and elevated enforcement of cannabis lead to elevated availability of methamphetamine. (google ICE and Pokalo). It amounts to policy, politics and police trying to rewrite the law of supply and demand. On this matter the Police are neither experts nor equipped to make reasoned argument despite purporting to have 'drug intelligence'. They are neither health professionals or scientists. Acceptance of this continuing demonisation of drug use, itself a recipe for failure, demonstrates a severe anomaly in civil discourse where those who are briefed to uphold the law also practise the making of it. It can be fairly said, and has been my senior judge's, that "cannabis is not criminogenic, whereas prohibition is!" - for that is where the conversation must start. Thankfully President Obama, even if belatedly, is now on the case. Our continued support for this 'locked in paradigm' will, in time, become nothing more than an embarrassment that we could be so stupid to believe doubling and redoubling our prohibition efforts will eventually make a positive difference. There comes a point where ceasing banging our collective heads against a brick wall becomes an evolutionary act.
The greater risk of harm the less logical it is to hand over the quality control of 'emerging anything' to the black economy. It should be noted that, while all the people survived in spite of the risky nature of their experiential dalliance, these 'harms' occurred on the watch of prohibition. It is utterly predictable. History instructs us well. We banned BZP despite its high safety profile, and got, for our moral wowsering a raft of new entries, untested, untried and of highly variable potency. So to when they were banned, we get this 'new' threat. We know banning low alcohol beer lead to the whisky stills. The science and economics demonstrate quite clearly the banning and elevated enforcement of cannabis lead to elevated availability of methamphetamine. (google ICE and Pokalo). It amounts to policy, politics and police trying to rewrite the law of supply and demand. On this matter the Police are neither experts nor equipped to make reasoned argument despite purporting to have 'drug intelligence'. They are neither health professionals or scientists. Acceptance of this continuing demonisation of drug use, itself a recipe for failure, demonstrates a severe anomaly in civil discourse where those who are briefed to uphold the law also practise the making of it. It can be fairly said, and has been my senior judge's, that "cannabis is not criminogenic, whereas prohibition is!" - for that is where the conversation must start. Thankfully President Obama, even if belatedly, is now on the case. Our continued support for this 'locked in paradigm' will, in time, become nothing more than an embarrassment that we could be so stupid to believe doubling and redoubling our prohibition efforts will eventually make a positive difference. There comes a point where ceasing banging our collective heads against a brick wall becomes an evolutionary act.The greater risk of harm the less logical it is to hand over the quality control of 'emerging anything' to the black economy. It should be noted that, while all the people survived in spite of the risky nature of their experiential dalliance, these 'harms' occurred on the watch of prohibition. It is utterly predictable. History instructs us well. We banned BZP despite its high safety profile, and got, for our moral wowsering a raft of new entries, untested, untried and of highly variable potency. So to when they were banned, we get this 'new' threat. We know banning low alcohol beer lead to the whisky stills. The science and economics demonstrate quite clearly the banning and elevated enforcement of cannabis lead to elevated availability of methamphetamine. (google ICE and Pokalo). It amounts to policy, politics and police trying to rewrite the law of supply and demand. On this matter the Police are neither experts nor equipped to make reasoned argument despite purporting to have 'drug intelligence'. They are neither health professionals or scientists. Acceptance of this continuing demonisation of drug use, itself a recipe for failure, demonstrates a severe anomaly in civil discourse where those who are briefed to uphold the law also practise the making of it. It can be fairly said, and has been my senior judge's, that "cannabis is not criminogenic, whereas prohibition is!" - for that is where the conversation must start. Thankfully President Obama, even if belatedly, is now on the case. Our continued support for this 'locked in paradigm' will, in time, become nothing more than an embarrassment that we could be so stupid to believe doubling and redoubling our prohibition efforts will eventually make a positive difference. There comes a point where ceasing banging our collective heads against a brick wall becomes an evolutionary act.
The greater risk of harm the less logical it is to hand over the quality control of 'emerging anything' to the black economy. It should be noted that, while all the people survived in spite of the risky nature of their experiential dalliance, these 'harms' occurred on the watch of prohibition. It is utterly predictable. History instructs us well. We banned BZP despite its high safety profile, and got, for our moral wowsering a raft of new entries, untested, untried and of highly variable potency. So to when they were banned, we get this 'new' threat. We know banning low alcohol beer lead to the whisky stills. The science and economics demonstrate quite clearly the banning and elevated enforcement of cannabis lead to elevated availability of methamphetamine. (google ICE and Pokalo). It amounts to policy, politics and police trying to rewrite the law of supply and demand. On this matter the Police are neither experts nor equipped to make reasoned argument despite purporting to have 'drug intelligence'. They are neither health professionals or scientists. Acceptance of this continuing demonisation of drug use, itself a recipe for failure, demonstrates a severe anomaly in civil discourse where those who are briefed to uphold the law also practise the making of it. It can be fairly said, and has been my senior judge's, that "cannabis is not criminogenic, whereas prohibition is!" - for that is where the conversation must start. Thankfully President Obama, even if belatedly, is now on the case. Our continued support for this 'locked in paradigm' will, in time, become nothing more than an embarrassment that we could be so stupid to believe doubling and redoubling our prohibition efforts will eventually make a positive difference. There comes a point where ceasing banging our collective heads against a brick wall becomes an evolutionary act.The greater risk of harm the less logical it is to hand over the quality control of 'emerging anything' to the black economy. It should be noted that, while pretty much all the people survived our BZP experiment, in spite of the risky nature of their experiential dalliance, these claims of  'harms' occurred on the watch of prohibition. It is utterly predictable. History instructs us well.

Ball-and-stick model of the fentanyl molecule ...
Ball-and-stick model of the fentanyl molecule
Journal of Chemical Crystallography : 
We banned BZP despite its high safety profile (millions of doses per year), and got, for our moral wowser'ing a raft of new entries, untested, untried and of highly variable potency. So too, when they were banned, we get these 'new' threats. The latest is fentanyl, a seriously potent opioid diverted from legal sources.

We know banning low alcohol beer leads to the whisky stills.

The science and economics demonstrate quite clearly the banning and elevated enforcement of cannabis lead to the elevated availability of methamphetamine. (google ICE and Pokalo). It amounts to policy, politics and police trying to rewrite the law of supply and demand.

On this matter, the Police are neither experts nor equipped to make reasoned argument despite purporting to have 'drug intelligence'. They are neither health professionals nor scientists. Acceptance of this continuing demonisation of drug use, itself a recipe for failure, demonstrates a severe anomaly in civil discourse where those who are briefed to uphold the law also practise the making of it. It can be fairly said, and has been by senior judge's, that "cannabis is not criminogenic, whereas prohibition is!" - for that is where the conversation must start.

Thankfully former NZ Prime Minister Helen Clark, even if belatedly, is now on the case. Our continued support for this 'locked in paradigm' will, in time, become nothing more than an embarrassment that we could be so stupid to believe doubling and redoubling our prohibition efforts will eventually make a positive difference.

There comes a point where ceasing banging our collective heads against a brick wall becomes an evolutionary act.

Blair Anderson http://The greater risk of harm the less logical it is to hand over the quality control of 'emerging anything' to the black economy. It should be noted that, while all the people survived in spite of the risky nature of their experiential dalliance, these 'harms' occurred on the watch of prohibition. It is utterly predictable. History instructs us well. We banned BZP despite its high safety profile, and got, for our moral wowsering a raft of new entries, untested, untried and of highly variable potency. So to when they were banned, we get this 'new' threat. We know banning low alcohol beer lead to the whisky stills. The science and economics demonstrate quite clearly the banning and elevated enforcement of cannabis lead to elevated availability of methamphetamine. (google ICE and Pokalo). It amounts to policy, politics and police trying to rewrite the law of supply and demand. On this matter the Police are neither experts nor equipped to make reasoned argument despite purporting to have 'drug intelligence'. They are neither health professionals or scientists. Acceptance of this continuing demonisation of drug use, itself a recipe for failure, demonstrates a severe anomaly in civil discourse where those who are briefed to uphold the law also practise the making of it. It can be fairly said, and has been my senior judge's, that "cannabis is not criminogenic, whereas prohibition is!" - for that is where the conversation must start. Thankfully President Obama, even if belatedly, is now on the case. Our continued support for this 'locked in paradigm' will, in time, become nothing more than an embarrassment that we could be so stupid to believe doubling and redoubling our prohibition efforts will eventually make a positive difference. There comes a point where ceasing banging our collective heads against a brick wall becomes an evolutionary act..blogsThe greater risk of harm the less logical it is to hand over the quality control of 'emerging anything' to the black economy. It should be noted that, while all the people survived in spite of the risky nature of their experiential dalliance, these 'harms' occurred on the watch of prohibition. It is utterly predictable. History instructs us well. We banned BZP despite its high safety profile, and got, for our moral wowsering a raft of new entries, untested, untried and of highly variable potency. So to when they were banned, we get this 'new' threat. We know banning low alcohol beer lead to the whisky stills. The science and economics demonstrate quite clearly the banning and elevated enforcement of cannabis lead to elevated availability of methamphetamine. (google ICE and Pokalo). It amounts to policy, politics and police trying to rewrite the law of supply and demand. On this matter the Police are neither experts nor equipped to make reasoned argument despite purporting to have 'drug intelligence'. They are neither health professionals or scientists. Acceptance of this continuing demonisation of drug use, itself a recipe for failure, demonstrates a severe anomaly in civil discourse where those who are briefed to uphold the law also practise the making of it. It can be fairly said, and has been my senior judge's, that "cannabis is not criminogenic, whereas prohibition is!" - for that is where the conversation must start. Thankfully President Obama, even if belatedly, is now on the case. Our continued support for this 'locked in paradigm' will, in time, become nothing more than an embarrassment that we could be so stupid to believe doubling and redoubling our prohibition efforts will eventually make a positive difference. There comes a point where ceasing banging our collective heads against a brick wall becomes an evolutionary act.pot.com
View blog reactions

Monday, March 26, 2018

Why is thinking Illegal?

English: Dust jacket of the book Mein Kampf, w...
English: Dust jacket of the book Mein Kampf, written by Adolf Hitler. Courtesy of the New York Public Library Digital Collection. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
If, on the premise, the Misuse of Drugs Act posits that USE (of some drugs) leads to Harm then by definition possession is a thought crime.

Certainly, no more than my tattered copy of Mien Kampf makes me anti-semite.

View blog reactions
 

Another Mild Green Initiative



  (search tips)

Visitor Map
Visitor Map, daily!

Visitor Map, previous 6 months

MildGreen Technorati Search
Web Blog Pinging Service Blog Flux Directory Blogarama - The Blog Directory Find Blogs in the Blog Directory Search For Blogs, Submit Blogs, The Ultimate Blog Directory Health Blog Top Sites Google PageRank Checker Tool Top Blogs Health blogs