Drug Law Reform Australia - will be standing for senate in September!

[Tronica]

You may be aware that we have a federal election coming up in September.

Here is a new party you may consider voting for:

Drug Law Reform Australia

From their website:

Drug Law Reform Australia is Australia’s newest political force.

We are not pro-drugs though we support decriminalisation, regulation and harm minimisation of currently illegal drugs. We are calling for the end of the so called “war on drugs”.

As a political movement, we seek representation in Parliament. We believe the two major parties are incapable of solving this national problem. Their tough on crime rhetoric, trivializes the problem.

We are different to existing parties in that we do not aspire to government. We exist solely to pursue a policy of drug law reform.

We believe the current prohibition does not protect our children from illicit drugs or drug addiction. It fuels corruption of our democratic institutions and feeds billions of dollars to criminals and terrorists.

We aim to contribute to the drug law debate and influence public opinion on all matters relating to Drug Policy.

We want to stop ordinary Australians being treated like criminals and we want to stop criminals profiting from the illegal drug trade.

We want to regulate and tax the sale of drugs so profits are spend on health and rehabilitation services for those affected.

We are aware of the dangers of excessive drug use but know that drug use cannot be eradicated by the criminal justice system. It will be curbed by education and the provision of health services.

We believe the criminal law, the police, the courts and jails are not the solution. This “Tough on Crime” solution has been tried for over 40 years, cost billions of dollars and failed.

We believe the case to reevaluate the current drug laws to be self-evident and call for fact and evidence base drug policies.

We believe that the government must stop making ordinary Australians into criminals.

There’s a clear lack of leadership on this issue coming from the government and opposition.

Unlike the major parties, our focus is clear. We do not stand for anything else than Drug Law Reform.

 

[poledriver]

We want to regulate and tax the sale of drugs so profits are spend on health and rehabilitation services for those affected.

spent?

We do not stand for anything else than Drug Law Reform.

'other than' ?

We believe the case to reevaluate the current drug laws to be self-evident and call for fact and evidence base drug policies.

re-evaluate? based?

Is my Engrish correct? I see a few other things as well, I may be incorrect, but oh well.

 

[aussie101]

^ I may have considered voting for the first time if their spelling and grammar had not been so bad

 

[Tronica]

I also noticed some typos. Why not email them the corrections to draw their attention to it?

The guy heading this up is the son of Don Chipp, who started the Australian Democrats.

I was forwarded an email by Dr Alex Wodak, who you may be familiar with, which I quote below:

Dear All,

Drug Law Reform Australia Inc is a new organisation aspiring to be a single issue political party as soon as possible.

The founder and President is Mr Greg Chipp.

Greg's father, Don, was liked and admired by many Australians.

He had been a Federal Cabinet Minister and then founded a new political party, the Australian Democrats.

Please visit the web site of Drug Law Reform Australia:

http://druglawreform.com.au/

and tell others about this important new development.

Membership is only $25 and can be arranged and paid for over the internet.

Greg's argument, which is hard to refute, is that drug law reform is too difficult an issue for the major parties to deal with.

Yet it is too important an issue to be postponed indefinitely.

One thing that the Prime Minister and Leader of the Opposition agreed on immediately in 2012 was that they just did not want to talk about Australia's drug policy.

Prominent supporters of drug prohibition declined invitations to the two Australia21 Roundtables on drug policy in 2012.

Both Australia21 reports concluded that drug prohibition had failed comprehensively and both reports provoked a spirited debate in the media.

(Both reports can be downloaded at the A21 website: http://www.australia21.org.au/ )

The only prominent supporter of drug prohibition to publicly try defend this policy was Mr Peter Dutton MP, Shadow Minister for Health.

Mr Mick Palmer, a former Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police during the Tough on Drugs period, responded:

“Australian police are now better trained, generally better equipped and resourced and more operationally effective that at any time in our history, but, on any objective assessment policing of the illicit drug market has had only marginal impact on the profitability of the drug trade or the availability of illicit drugs.”

Drug Law Reform Australia Inc will be launched in a little over a week.

It needs 500 members to register as a political party.

It needs to register as a political party to field candidates in an election.

Those 500 members need to join pretty quickly if DLRA is going to take part in the September 14 Federal elections.

Please consider joining DLRA.

Please send this e-mail on to your friends.

Best wishes,

Alex

 

[Tronica]

What I'm trying to say is that it may be worth putting yourself on the electoral role in 2013 so you get a vote for drug law reform. Regardless of the grammatical scorecard for their initial website offering

 

[aussie101]

The guy heading this up is the son of Don Chipp, who started the Australian Democrats.

I was forwarded an email by Dr Alex Wodak

I am familiar with both. This is a good cause so its getting me thinking...

What I'm trying to say is that it may be worth putting yourself on the electoral role in 2013 so you get a vote for drug law reform.

I am weighing up the possibility of future fines for not turning up to vote, jury duty letters (not that I'd make a good jury member lol) with the greater good of having/supporting a party that represents something that i honestly believe to be the way forwards re the "war on drugs" matter.

Thanks for the info

 

[poledriver]

Yeah it sounds like a good idea. I just emailed them and asked if they were baked when they wrote it.

Just kidding, i emailed them with some things I noticed that may be incorrect on their homepage.

Yeah, thanks for the info.

 

[thestudent14]

^hahaha

Yeah I too noticed their typo's. I'll most likely vote for them, the Sex Party normally has some pretty good drug law reform views too, but I haven't checked for about two years.

 

[Tronica]

I am weighing up the possibility of future fines for not turning up to vote, jury duty letters (not that I'd make a good jury member lol) with the greater good of having/supporting a party that represents something that i honestly believe to be the way forwards re the "war on drugs" matter.

You don't have to turn up very often. If you don't like future candidates, just donkey vote. And I still haven't ever received a jury duty letter... maybe my time is around the corner.

But in the end, all our votes matter if we are to have a chance of making change. in my humble opinion

There is also, of course, the Australian HEMP party. And the SEX party. You can vote for multiple parties in the senate anyway by numbering boxes in order of preference. The annoying thing is you have to number all the boxes. While it sucks, it is worth doing... and if it is like last federal election, there are good online tools to make it a lot either to number all the boxes (do it beforehand using online tools, print off, then copy by hand in the booth).

Anyway, we have a few more months yet !

 

[Divine Moments]

Interesting, thanks for posting

You don't have to turn up very often. If you don't like future candidates, just donkey vote.

Why donkey vote when you can just hand in the form blank?

 

[Seth_Heinmann]

Sorry guys, I just saw this thread. Isn't it awesome. Every sensible person has to join this one.

 

[footscrazy]

Why donkey vote when you can just hand in the form blank?

I always used the term donkey vote to mean exactly that - handing in a blank vote, but looking it up it appears that's not the most common definition.

Very interesting Tronica, thanks for posting this. It's something I'm going to have to look into more thoroughly when I get a chance.

 

[mister]

are any founding members of this party registered here on BL?

 

[Tronica]

I always used the term donkey vote to mean exactly that - handing in a blank vote, but looking it up it appears that's not the most common definition.

Um, that's exactly what I meant. Any 'invalid' vote. That can mean a blank vote but it can also mean numbering all the squares with a 1. What do others think it means?

 

[Tronica]

are any founding members of this party registered here on BL?

I don't think so. Bluelight party, anyone? Maybe one day.

 

[poledriver]

The website is looking much nicer and easier to read without those errors. They seem to have replaced each one I suggested, so I guess they used my suggestion, they could have said thanks tho lol..

I'll be interested to watch the updates and any new ideas or releases they make in the lead up to sept.

 

[CrayZ]

There comes a time when you have to stick your balls and boobs on the line. But the real question is do I feel strongly enough about this issue to do so? I'm not sure.

Still typos on the site:

"If you don't want to join a political party we understand, but you (can?) still make a Donation."

"Not only can supply never be stopped but the drug trade is a billion (dollar?) cash cow for organized crime and terrorist organizations that undermine the very fabric of our democracy." (and shouldn't "organize" be spelled with an "S" in Australia?)

 

[poledriver]

Well picked up.

Australian spelling is generally very similar to British spelling. In words like organise, realise, both -ise and -ize are accepted, as in British English, but, -ise is preferred. - wiki.

And another one on the 'political party' page, I hadn't looked at the other pages on their site, just the homepage.

The result of this entrenched party discipline is that decisions of national importance are made by faceless men behind closed door, unscrutinised by the electorate and at the bequest of vested interests.

- doors.

Such a party should be a party to, and a party for, honest debate. A party that holds that consensus is not only possible but essential to resolving the difficult issues face by Australians today.

- faced.

These new age political parties, or non traditional single issue parties, can trade preferences and gain the 5th and 6th senate seats in each state.

- nontraditional, or non-traditional?

Image a political party whose members always vote according to their conscience.

- imagine.

 

[CrayZ]

And if people think we're nitpicking, then they're right. But better it's us than some smart-arse journalist with an agenda.

(Yikes. I just had this horrible thought that they may have 'outsourced' the web page development.)

 

[poledriver]

Either way, mistakes should be picked up before it hits the general public. It's just not a good over all look.