The 'Harm Reduction' party

[madmick19]

A couple of years ago Stargate International trialled their Ease party pill in NZ. Those opposing Ease (or party pills per se) highlighted the reported effects in published literature, but their main point in the argument was that Methylone had already been banned in many western countries, and was a controlled analogue by definition in most countries that employed analogue legislation. That was the end of that....
\

from memory they sold really well at drugs conference with many top drug and alcohol policy advisors and health officials partaking in them. i'll forever remember that night and Dr Platypus Vs madmick drinking contest.

PD while im sure the effort it takes to change is immense what we are really talking about here is normative policy, how we think the world should be. Look at the greens for example they keep marching on because of their vision.

Vision and belief is all it takes

 

[Infinite Jest]

Excellent posts P_D. Just a few points on the NZ situation:

- I'm pretty sure that Ease was covered by our analogue laws. At least, that's what the authorities said, and Stargate didn't fight it. (I'm really annoyed, I never got round to signing up for the trial )
- piperazines would have been banned sooner or later. Probably sooner. I really doubt that outside influence had anything to do with it. Mainstream political opinion was either National - 'ban them now', or Labour/Progressives: 'I think they should be banned, but I want some evidence of potential harm before I ban them'. As soon as Anderton got that evidence, he banned them. Even if he hadn't, National (now in government) would have banned them by now.

Another thing I want to add: public opinion polls (at least in NZ) have consistently shown that the majority of people want harsher sentences for drug use, not lighter sentences. We might not like to think this, but that's what the polls show. (Though the last one I saw was a few years ago now, and pre-dates the party pills, so things may have changed). Don't assume that a huge number of people would support drug legalisation, just because everyone you know would

(Incidentally, in NZ the single issue Legalise Cannabis Party got about 1.2% - so even with proportional representation, they were a long way from getting a seat in Parliament).

 

[Jakeperson]

The good doctor perhaps?

Of course because of the legality of drugs and to protect the innocent (ie. wife and kids) no-one in my extended family knows about my drug habits. I guess I and plenty others would have to 'come out' in order to support the cause. Would I be prepared to do this? Maybe... More so if I was in good company...

This is some thing I have thought about a lot. We as drug users have grown up and lived as if using drugs is a disease, or something we should be ashamed of. But who the fuck made that rule?

We need every one to start saying "You know what? I'm a drug user and I'm proud!"

Half of the time these days I won't hang around people who don't do drugs because of their ignorance. And for some reason a lot of non-drug users don't seem to be as open or intelligent.
There are exceptions of course.

 

[phase_dancer]

- I'm pretty sure that Ease was covered by our analogue laws. At least, that's what the authorities said, and Stargate didn't fight it. (I'm really annoyed, I never got round to signing up for the trial )

I seem to remember the keto (or ketone) group not being present on the piece of analogue legislation I once saw from NZ. It's probably been added now, although, if a beta ketone has been specifically listed, all the cathinones would be covered anyway.

Yes, I knew Anderton was principally against party pills, so I thought it was bound to happen sooner or later, but it seemed a coincidence that the announcement was made when it was. The UN were definitely applying pressure, in much the same way they did to reduce the focus on HR in Australia.

 

[madmick19]

This is some thing I have thought about a lot. We as drug users have grown up and lived as if using drugs is a disease, or something we should be ashamed of. But who the fuck made that rule?
We need every one to start saying "You know what? I'm a drug user and I'm proud!"

the mods are working on a drug discussion resources sticky thread for ADD, in it is an essay on the history of drug use as a problem. If you can hold off till then it might help your understanding of the topic.

other than that try this article

 

[Jakeperson]

i thought this was abouit a rave party called "harm reduction" LOL

I think one day it would be nice to get Aus BL members together for some kind of function.
I think we'd all have fun

Although we'd have to wear name tags with our user names on them and then try to remember actual names.
Could be quite confusing.

 

[Infinite Jest]

I seem to remember the keto (or ketone) group not being present on the piece of analogue legislation I once saw from NZ. It's probably been added now, although, if a beta ketone has been specifically listed, all the cathinones would be covered anyway.

I'll take your word for it, I'm not knowledgeable enough to actually understand the chemistry in our laws . And actually, there's an argument been made that the laws aren't clear enough for a judge to convict, and they haven't been tested in court (at least as of early last year), so maybe Ease was legal - but Stargate were certainly told that it wasn't.

 

[HaRdStYLeR]

i'd love to see this happen but if someone were to stand up and work for this it wouldn't be the anti-drugs campaigners and police etc. you would need to worry about. it would be the people making billions of dollars from making these drugs.
as soon as someone started to make the slightest impact there would be people wanting them dead

 

[alfisti72]

Our spokespeople would need to be non-users with no history themselves, can you imaging the amount of LE scrutiny and monitoring that would focus on anyone who stuck their head over the parapet??

Like many other posters here, I try to spread the education work wherever and whenever I can, and hope that by doing so, and referring people to sites like this, I can at least cause people to pause before they condemn...

But I'll go on record as another pair of willing hands for the cause.

"and remember, the safety word is banana"

 

[expothead]

i'd love to see this happen but if someone were to stand up and work for this it wouldn't be the anti-drugs campaigners and police etc. you would need to worry about. it would be the people making billions of dollars from making these drugs.
as soon as someone started to make the slightest impact there would be people wanting them dead

probably. it's gonna be don mackay all over. but more ironic isn't it, that the 'customers' will also be the enemy.

sometimes I think that tough drug penalties were originally created by those people to keep the price artificially inflated... Current politicians enforcing this are now merely pawns for the large-scale drug dealer...

 

[Cowboy Mac]

This is what I have learned in being involved with such efforts in the past. In order to achieve any meaningful success and therefore change in any Government policy you need a multiple pronged strategy.

• You need to coordinate your publicity, which also means having someone professionally trained (or using a company specialising in such thigns) with experience to coordinate your efforts.
  
• You need have scientific studies to backup your point of view because if you don't you will have no credibility. This also means having working relationships with respected AOD organisations, not just the fringe organisations.
  
• You also unfortunately need to be well funded. Change costs money because you need professionals with experience to assist your cause. Volunteers are great, but you need experience and even those willing to assist will not be able to viably donate the time required because the investment is immense. If it was easy it would already be done.

It is idealistic to think that you can change things for the better without having all of the above. Sorry kids!

p.s. hi to all!

 

[moderateuser]

[*]You also unfortunately need to be well funded. Change costs money because you need professionals with experience to assist your cause. Volunteers are great, but you need experience and even those willing to assist will not be able to viably donate the time required because the investment is immense. If it was easy it would already be done.

Very True. The current climate of party professionalism has managed preclude the success of even more plausible ambitions.

 

[eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee]

^ i disagree..Regarding finance issues

Their are more poor than rich. I believe we have reached a climax in this world at the moment...their comes a time when the poor stand up to the cause, the cause being the truth. The drug laws that exist at the moment are purely for money reasons a form of control by the rich. Over time it has been proven that change is inevitable...migration for food and better life (poor), overthrown governments(poor), rebellion's(poor)....changing of certain laws(poor) revolution's(poor) barrack obama (poor). In all these instances no money was required just a voice of unity, a cry for justice and the truth, ppl made sacrifices, devoted time for the one true cause "the truth"....whether this is the time for this, only time will tell....
is it time for the trickle to become a wave? I feel it is....
You are right in saying that you need facts, we have the facts right here "thank you for the internet".
One example i will use that explains the start of a rebellion/revolution involving the poor vs the rich right now is "piracy" (or sharing as the poor would call it lol) it's unstoppable ! Word got out that they "can't throw us all in jail"lol . I challenge anyone who thinks that they can stop it or who thinks that someone soon will come up whith a solution to combat piracy. We have a means of communication to the poor and the truth hungry of the world, that is the internet ppl's so lets devote some time and give it a try.

* denial is a curse....

** my apologies to the few rich who have consideration and compassion for the truth

 

[Mr Blonde]

barrack obama (poor). In all these instances no money was required just a voice of unity, a cry for justice and the truth, ppl made sacrifices, devoted time for the one true cause "the truth"....whether this is the time for this, only time will tell....

Look up the figures spent on the election campaigns over there. It's crazy.

Finance will be important, but how many donors are out there willing to give money to support a harm reduction cause? How many are willing to have their name associated with something controversial like this?

I'd like to see this happen though, just don't know where to start...

 

[eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee]

^
I totally agree $ are important, however we can start a discussion regarding issues and policies that we all find important to us right here in this thread or even start another thread if you like regarding this matter...as ideas flood in we can set priority's as to what we can use as policies discussion will help alot....this isn't going to be easy but i feel we must start somewhere. Even if it fails to take off we maybe starting the trickle for future generations......

 

[Jakeperson]

It has to start some where.

And I know even if we fail, it's some thing I'd like to be apart of.

 

[moderateuser]

^ i disagree..Regarding finance issues...

barrack obama (poor).

Barrack Obama ran the most expensive political campaign in world history.

In Australia grass roots support from local party branches is hardly existant at all any more. Even the major parties are losing members. Its all about contributions from the buisness sector and our tax dollars used to fund a highly experienced and professional team of advertisers and accountants, the good old days of fundraising BBQs and armies of volunteers handing out pamphlets are dead.

Also (though I don't mean to be condescending) your Marxist rich-poor dichotomy is fairly outdated, 99% of people are petite bourgeoisie. That's may major party policies entertain a trend of convergance on some kind of golden mean (though the Liberals do seem more eratic than usual in policy at the moment.)

 

[filenet]

um! faark! what the fark does that mean?

 

[phase_dancer]

This is what I have learned in being involved with such efforts in the past. In order to achieve any meaningful success and therefore change in any Government policy you need a multiple pronged strategy.

* You need to coordinate your publicity, which also means having someone professionally trained (or using a company specialising in such thigns) with experience to coordinate your efforts.
* You need have scientific studies to backup your point of view because if you don't you will have no credibility. This also means having working relationships with respected AOD organisations, not just the fringe organisations.
* You also unfortunately need to be well funded. Change costs money because you need professionals with experience to assist your cause. Volunteers are great, but you need experience and even those willing to assist will not be able to viably donate the time required because the investment is immense. If it was easy it would already be done.

It is idealistic to think that you can change things for the better without having all of the above. Sorry kids!

p.s. hi to all!

And Hi to you Cowboy Mac!! Thanks for the input, all very good points. Hope we see more of you around these parts

 

[Jakeperson]

Just an idea.


Obviously the big corporations are in control here. They have the money. We need to show them away to be able to make big money out of this.
Eg. Companies making substances such as MDMA for sale to the government or directly to the users following gov. regulation and control.

Dunno how well it will work but the drug industry is at the moment the 2nd most profitable I believe.