• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    Australian & Asian
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: swilow | Vagabond696

NEWS: West Australian - 29/11/07 'Cannabis laws should be tightened: review' (WA)

lil angel15

lil angel15

Bluelight Crew
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
7,828
Cannabis laws should be tightened: review
29th November 2007, 12:45 WST

A review of Western Australian cannabis laws has recommended tougher penalties for people caught with the drug, including prosecution for people growing marijuana plants.

The possession of small amounts of cannabis is unlawful but does not attract a criminal record under the Cannabis Infringement Notice (CIN) scheme in WA, providing for a fine or drug education.

A statutory review of the Cannabis Control Act, introduced four years ago, has recommended the continuation of the CIN scheme but wants it improved by reducing the quantity of cannabis to which the scheme applies from 30 grams to 15 grams.

It has also recommended removing the offences of cultivation of non-hydroponic cannabis plants from the CIN scheme and including juveniles in the scheme for which cannabis education would be mandatory.

Attorney-General Jim McGinty said under the proposed changes, people caught with more than 15 grams of cannabis would face criminal prosecution.

Between 2005 and May 2007, there were 1,839 juvenile minor drug offences recorded by WA police and the Drug and Alcohol Office has stated that most would have involved cannabis.

Of these, 228 (12 per cent) were referred to a juvenile justice team, while 1,611 (88 per cent) were issued with a caution.

“It is clear from these statistics that most teenagers don’t face any consequences for possessing cannabis and I’m sure parents would support the introduction of mandatory education to prevent future problems in their lives,” Mr McGinty said.

Mr McGinty said the government was likely to support a recommendation to significantly increase the current CIN fine of $100 for possessing up to 15 grams of cannabis to provide extra incentive for offenders to attend an education session.

Cabinet will consider the recommendations.
Click to expand...

West Australian
 
Great, so that means that you have to buy 1/2 ounces then? Haven't come across too many dealers that sell in that quantity, perhaps it will become a new standard. Of course, I guess you could go halves with a mate, but then there'd be fights over who gets the best buds.
 
I fail to see the recommender's point, and how exactly it will it make a difference?
Short on quota are we, better keep up the corporate profits??
 
Awful idea. It's just going to make criminals out of ordinary people (moreso than drug laws already do). If anything, they should be doubling their limit.
 
decontructionist said:
Great, so that means that you have to buy 1/2 ounces then? Haven't come across too many dealers that sell in that quantity, perhaps it will become a new standard. Of course, I guess you could go halves with a mate, but then there'd be fights over who gets the best buds.
Click to expand...

If you have 14 grams in an ounce bag then the cops will do you for 17.3ish grams as they include the baggie.
 
^^I'm not certain on this, but in my experience it has not been the case that they weigh extraneous content - surely you could argue that in court. Although, in my experience they did weigh extraneous content when there was too little cannabis to move the scales and they couldn't seperate it out from the tobacco 8)
 
decontructionist said:
^^I'm not certain on this, but in my experience it has not been the case that they weigh extraneous content - surely you could argue that in court. Although, in my experience they did weigh extraneous content when there was too little cannabis to move the scales and they couldn't seperate it out from the tobacco 8)
Click to expand...



Mmm well the 11.5 g quarter ounce the cops charged me with begs to differ

As did the 32 gram ounce I was busted with.


So either my scales have been low and my dealers generous

Or

The cops weigh the baggy
 
Generous dealers - wow things have changed ;)

Admittedly, the experience that I reported was some time ago (I haven’t smoked pot for almost 6 years), so perhaps things have changed. If it were me in that situation now, however, I would ask my lawyer to question the method of weighing since it makes a difference in terms of the penalty. Its always important to know your legal rights.
 
lol 32! oldschool.

they initially weigh it as that at the police station. If you want to get it "lab analyzed" and ajourn court for a few months, then they cant weigh the baggie. Sadly, purity rarely makes a difference, although hydro is looked upon much worse, especially if its not possession.
I know someone who got a giant thousand+ fine for 20mg of very impure methamphetamine base. The amount of meth left in that baggie looked like residue because thats all it was, wouldn't even think 20mg, and after you take away purity, like 3mg meth :p
 
I find it a little strange that they differentiate between hydro and bush^ is WA one of only places in the world that legislates against a particular growing method?

Anyway the thing that shits me most about this is that they are taking away the option of growing your own with out fear of criminal conviction. A big step backwards if you ask me. It just puts the power back in the hands of organized grow ops and the people with the money to run them.
 
Also I just read the full print version of this and McGinty is quoted as saying that so far the scheme has saved the state $2m and that cannabis use has decreased. And this means the laws arent working because....???
 
Where I live they don't bother busting anything but hydroponic setups that are giant houses full of growing rooms, used just for growing, or old industrial sheds or places like that. Lack of police but also it's obvious hydro is setup for big profit, often involves stolen electricity and is considered a "drug lab", as fires can start from faulty equipment or lights. They seem to think the chemicals not flushed from the plant is causing more psychosis and is more addictive.

They know bush only has good value in Nimbin and South Australia, I don't have any idea on W.A. bush prices. Most bush you see that is grown on a smaller scale isn't going to make much money and it's more often the grower is just some 63 year old stoner with pain problems so it's a waste of money. effort and court time. But, they do it once a year in Nimbin just to show police are "doing their job"
 
justsayknow said:
I find it a little strange that they differentiate between hydro and bush^ is WA one of only places in the world that legislates against a particular growing method?
Click to expand...

Australian drug laws that make sense? Then what would I have to talk about?

On the topic of drug laws, a friend just e-mail from Bali saying that BZP party pills are sold in most convenience stores there now - WTF!!. I find it odd that Indonesia, a country with some of the harshest drug penalties in the world, sees BZP okay when NZ and UK are legislating against it. Then again, you go to jail there for weed, but mushrooms are fine. The sanity in all this lies … where?
 
from drugs that make money and attract foreingers for cheap drugs and party life
 
justsayknow said:
I find it a little strange that they differentiate between hydro and bush^ is WA one of only places in the world that legislates against a particular growing method?
Click to expand...

Hydro is also treated differently here in SA, where the laws allows 1 outdoor plant to be grown. I believe NT allows 2 plants, but not of hydro either. This is a relatively new development - during the 90's (in SA) you could have a hydro setup and 12 plants, and get a $150 fine. No doubt the courts are now wasting a lot of time and money dealing with small scale hydro setups of around 3-6 plants.
 
Well I've just done a little bit of reading and it seems that the sole justification for changing the 2 plant rule is that police find it too complex.

Quote:

"It is the view of the police that the current scheme is unnecessarily complex, particularly in relation to the growing of non-hydroponic plants and that this is a barrier to consistent and streamlined implementation."

From
http://www.dao.health.wa.gov.au/Pub...efault.aspx?EntryId=933&Command=Core.Download
 
Has anyone heard whether these laws have been passed? Ive been away for a bit and have heard nothing...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top