• DPMC Moderators: thegreenhand | tryptakid
  • Drug Policy & Media Coverage Welcome Guest
    View threads about
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Drug Busts Megathread Video Megathread

Australia - Proposed NSW police powers to search convicted drug dealers labelled 'unjust'

S.J.B.

Bluelight Crew
Joined
Jan 22, 2011
Messages
6,886
Proposed NSW police powers to search convicted drug dealers labelled 'unjust'
Michael McGowan
The Guardian
November 16th, 2020
Proposed new laws that would allow New South Wales police to “stop, detain and search” anyone convicted of a serious drug offence in the past decade are “unjust” and would give police “extraordinary” power to target marginalised groups, legal and civil liberties groups have warned.

The government’s drug supply prohibition order bill, introduced to parliament last month and supported by the Labor opposition, would introduce a two-year pilot program in four local government areas allowing police to “search convicted drug dealers and manufacturers, as well as their homes and vehicles, at any time without a warrant”.

The proposed law could apply to someone who was a juvenile at the time of the offence, as long as police are able to secure an order from a magistrate.

The government says the bill would “assist police to gather evidence of drug supply and drug manufacture effectively and efficiently”, and target “serious drug offenders who have re‑engaged or are likely to re‑engage with drug supply or manufacture activities”.

But legal and civil liberties groups, as well as the Greens, say the bill would give extraordinary powers to search and detain people without due process, and warn that the definition of a “serious” offence in the bill is too broad.
Read the full story here.
 
Wtf.

This is why Australia needs a proper bill of rights.
 
Yeah cos there’s absolutely nothing wrong with America’s BOR....
Fuck does that have to do with anything.

Only think wrong with America's bill of rights is there aren't more of them, the 9th isn't actually used the way it was intended, and a couple of them are archaic.
 
Fuck does that have to do with anything.

Only think wrong with America's bill of rights is there aren't more of them, the 9th isn't actually used the way it was intended, and a couple of them are archaic.

We don’t need a BOR because we have a constitution and UDHR. These are proposed laws, they haven’t been passed yet and as evident from the article is receiving opposition for those exact reasons. Other than that was just taking a dig given that your BOR is frequently left open to interpretation so I don’t see how it would make any difference.
 
I think (and would hope) that this proposed law would be considered unconstitutional even in the U.S.

It would.

But Australia works under a principle of parliamentary sovereignty.

Which essentially means almost any "rights" that exist exist at the whims of the government of the day, subject to change at any time.

And in my experience, most Australians neither care nor see a problem with that.

I've given up arguing it with Australians which is why I never replied back to the above post.
 
I think (and would hope) that this proposed law would be considered unconstitutional even in the U.S.
Yeah just like any bet it will be proven unconstitutional here. Seriously, if this becomes a thing I’ll eat my hat. I’m sure all sorts of stupid crap has been proposed over in the US. Doesn’t mean it happens. You just have to Google it for examples https://www.usnews.com/opinion/slideshows/12-dumb-proposed-state-laws

And yeah we don’t need to open up the debate because it’s been done and by smarter people than us for example http://www.lawfoundation.net.au/ljf/app/A60DA51D4C6B0A51CA2571A7002069A0.html. But when you say shit like “this wouldn’t happen here” your arrogance is showing. Remember, you guys voted TRUMP into power. Maybe we’re not as worried because we don’t do stupid shit like that.
 
Last edited:
But when you say shit like “this wouldn’t happen here” your arrogance is showing. Remember, you guys voted TRUMP into power. Maybe we’re not as worried because we don’t do stupid shit like that.
I had no part in electing Trump or any other American president, I can assure you (hint: see my "Location"). ;)
 
I had no part in electing Trump or any other American president, I can assure you (hint: see my "Location"). ;)

I use bluelight on my phone 99% of the time. Which means I don't see your location.

And until I see it. You're American by default ;)

@Sirena Oscura does make a good point though. It probably won't happen.
 
Was more so firing it at Jess. But I can see how you thought I just meant you because you’re who I quoted.
 
Oh. I actually missed that part of your post originally.

For what it's worth, I was never trying to argue that America was better than Australia. Just that a bill of rights is by no means uniquely American and Australia could be well served by having one.

Course its kinda like saying America would be well served by moving to directly ranked presidential elections. Probably true but it ain't gonna happen.
 
I just find the position “you need a bill of rights” (like us) to be arrogant- as if that solves all problems and prevents all stupid proposed laws from being proposed (as per the link in my previous post with a bunch of examples of stupid proposed laws in America). It doesn’t. And we do just fine. I don’t care who is for or against it. But I defs won’t be taking notes from a country that elected Trump.
 
I just find the position “you need a bill of rights” (like us) to be arrogant- as if that solves all problems and prevents all stupid proposed laws from being proposed (as per the link in my previous post with a bunch of examples of stupid proposed laws in America). It doesn’t. And we do just fine. I don’t care who is for or against it. But I defs won’t be taking notes from a country that elected Trump.

Of course it doesn't solve everything.
But it does help the courts to impose checks in overreach of government power. And if you're thinking the Australian government can't overreach, frankly I think you're kidding yourself.

I nearly wrote in an earlier post that I think a lot of Australians reject a bill of rights simply because they see it as "American". I decided it was needlessly hostile though so I left it out of my post. In hindsight I kinda wish I hadn't because it really seems to be that your hostility is because you see it as "american".

Is I said bills of rights aren't uniquely American, Canada has a bill of rights too.

It reminds me of how some Australians hate Halloween being celebrated because they think it's American. Even though it's actually not.
 
I love Halloween.
I think America has a lot of pros and cons.
But you said “this is why Australia should have a bill of rights” as if that would what... stop a proposed law? Like how those stupid laws proposed in America were stopped from being proposed? (That’s sarcasm). You need to remember this isn’t a law/it has not been passed yet- it will likely fail as it is unconstitutional. We don’t need a “Bill of Rights” for it to be rejected. And as I said earlier, the reason we probably trust our elected officials more than you guys trust yours is because we don’t elect people like Trump. (I’m serious) There are pros and cons about having a bill of rights, but it’s completely irrelevant to the fact you’re just flouting your own dogma.
I’m not the one that came in here hating on America first, you sent the first shots with your comment about how “this wouldn’t happen if Australia had a bill of rights”. I’m just asking you to check your arrogance at the door.
 
We also just got rid of him. As well as legalized cannabis in quite a few more states, legalized mushrooms in Oregon, and decriminalized pretty much all drugs in Oregon...

I’d say those are steps in a much better direction than what I’m reading above.

-GC
 
Wtf.

This is why Australia needs a proper bill of rights.

This, is in fact what I said.
It's on you that you decide that my holding an opinion you disagree with is "arrogance".

Yet it's not arrogance at all I suppose for you to hold opinions about the US?

And indeed there have been situations where governments have enforced laws that would have been almost certainly thrown out in the US.

But I suspect the kind of examples I would be inclined to list you would interpret at all the more reason not to have a bill of rights.
 
Aus clearly needs some inelianable rights, doesn't have anything lilke it at the moment.
Aus looks like it is a testing ground for working how far anglocentric governments can push it.
Lizzy the Lizard Queen is head of state FFS

The USA never fully threw off the shackles of the British, and Australia has hardly even started.
 
Top