Hard News: Cabinet and the Reeferendum
86 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 Newer→ Last
-
Simon Armstrong, in reply to
I applaud the opt-out nature of the referendum – something I wish more than a single MP had done when it came to the small minded tinkering that were his legal high experiments on low income New Zealand.
I am beginning to think Greens made a huge mistake and the majority of the country is going to say no to commercial cannabis.
-
It is now blindingly obvious National are going to run a “just say no, two ticks for blue” campaign next election with maximum fact free FUD.
Middle aged male blowhards in the media will reckon their love and support National's "strong stand".
-
Tom Semmens, in reply to
Peter Dunne is not impressed.
Of course he is not impressed, that creakingly ancient stuffed shirt made an art form of obfuscation dressed in up a bow-tied tweed of supercilious pomposity.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
Peter Dunne is not impressed.
Well, he did have like 16 years or so to have a go himself....
-
andin, in reply to
Peter Dunne
He's not impressed about the non binding part for one, and that there will be no worked up bill for all to peruse before voting, second. It all reads like political gamesmanship to me. Dont know what he's fretting about really, he's getting a fucking fat govt pension so he can just fuck off AFAIC.
The Nats and FF are running full on scare campaigns which are more likely to influence the uninformed, that will be the biggest problem. I just want to be able to grow my own in peace. How long is that going to take? Fucking forever, death will come sooner at this rate. -
BenWilson, in reply to
How long is that going to take? Fucking forever, death will come sooner at this rate.
I've never felt it to be more imminent, TBH.
I don't really think the greatest danger is the idiotic Nats ATM, it's people within the coalition. Whilst it's an issue that has quite a lot of popular support, I don't think that is along anywhere near as partisan lines as issues like taxation or education. Which is part of the reason a referendum does make some sense. But the coalition does have the power to muck up the framing hard enough that it's just not quite going to cross the threshold. Hopefully they do not do that, they aim for a referendum that is sufficiently conservative that it has a high chance of a clear yes majority, whilst still representing meaningful and helpful reform.
National are basically playing themselves into a foolish corner because there is no required or even clearly likely link between a referendum yes and a party vote either way, and all they can do by failing to engage properly in good faith is show themselves to be disorganized and quite possibly to alienate a significant chunk of their currently dwindling vote.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
Peter Dunne is not impressed.
He’s full of shit. I’m already weary of all this high-constitutional posing, tbh.
Yes, it’s somewhat disappointing that the referendum will not be self-executing. But where was all the outrage during the year or so when the referendum wasn’t going to be binding?
I’m with Andrew Geddis: it’s not that big a deal.
I think Dunne is just annoyed because his idea was to legalise sales but ban home-growing. And this is bullshit:
And where will be the gangs be in all this? Will the proposed exemption for growing a small amount of cannabis for personal use address how that raw material is to be supplied, or will the silence of the Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill on supply be maintained, leaving the gangs' position effectively untouched?
The police discretion amendment only covers possession. There is nothing at all in that prevents supply to minors being treated very seriously.
-
Sacha, in reply to
But the coalition does have the power to muck up the framing hard enough that it’s just not quite going to cross the threshold.
They do seem to have a natural flair for fucking up framing.
-
andin, in reply to
I just hope your right.
, it’s people within the coalition.
So they are aiming the gun at their feet?
And if I have to read another fucking piece about what MP smoked pot and how they felt! ^$#*& FUCK !!!
Typically the response is 'made me feel uncomfortable' REALLY! So you couldnt carry on with your normal bullshit social routine? Then it fucking worked, that is what is supposed to happen. -
Every vote for Peter Dunne, over 4 or 5 successive elections, was a non-binding referendum on whether Labour or National would be in government.
I'd rather take my chances with the 95% probability of this referendum result being honoured by Labour and the Greens, than throw darts blindfold at Dunne's dartboard.
-
Meanwhile, Nick Smith is singing in cue with Family First over drugged gummy bears: https://www.familyfirst.org.nz/2019/05/suspended-nick-smith-says-drug-driving-bill-an-urgent-priority/
And California's pot tracking system is questioned:
https://www.familyfirst.org.nz/2019/05/wheres-the-pot-california-tracking-system-unlikely-to-know/ -
Has anybody written about NZ's local righties borrowing the 'gummy bears' theme from North Americans?
-
It's been a fairly consistent visual motif within Family First's anti-pot propaganda, with the accompanying rhetoric about 'child endangerment' since its inception. However, this aspect of its propaganda has not been subjected to critical analysis and exposure, no.
-
I think there may need to be regulations that state that any cannabis edibles should not be manufactured in a form that might potentially be attracted to children and should be clearly labelled as cannabis edibles: https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/wn7a9w/legal-weed-edibles-are-going-to-look-a-lot-different-by-next-year
-
So, no gummy bears permitted, perhaps? It would defuse a major visual propaganda motif and keep them away from children. Parents who eat them need to take steps to keep them under lock and key. away from small hands and mouths.
-
andin, in reply to
this aspect of its propaganda has not been subjected to critical analysis and exposure
Laughing at this stupid strategy is always fun, but then you run the risk of righteous offence being taken, and who knows how much mileage can be got out of that, tho you can be sure it’ll be driven as far & as hard as possible. A leaf symbol on packaging and childproofing are simple solutions. Tho ignorant self righteous indignation splashed everywhere can do damage on fully grown minds before a child is sighted.
And this passage from the Vice article in unscrupulous hands could be spun to read sensationalist headline material if that was ones intention.
“In 2013, eight children were admitted to the emergency room of Children’s Hospital Colorado after accidentally ingesting their parents’ pot food. Although this number is relatively low, it is a jump from the 2005–2013 time bracket, an eight-year span during which only eight children total were admitted.”
Ya know the kind of thing “100% INCREASE IN ONE YEAR’ blah blah. So maybe let it die a natural media death of yesterdays news.
-
Let's face it, though, after the mishap happened, Colorado moved quickly to remedy the situation by introducing what seems to be prudent and limited regulatory responses, which indicates that wholesale prohibition wasn't needed to offset this problem. Labelling and child protection warnings are reasonble steps and safeguards to take. '
I'd also take active steps to counter this prohibitionist spinmeistery too. The last thing personal use campaigners need is parents who might swallow Family First's propaganda campaign. It happened, it's in the past as you say, and it was resolved without a return to cannabis prohibition.
-
Unfortunately, this may be far more effective- Family First is now trying to link cannabis with psychotic episodes. There is a relationship, but it involves prior susceptibility to psychotic episodes and a medical diagnosis of schizophrenia. Any substance has contraindications and allergies. What needs to be done here is rig up a test that could tell whether that might be the case in advance, or else make it an offence to sell cannabis and some of its byproducts to that group of people: https://www.familyfirst.org.nz/2019/05/petition-calls-for-inquiry-into-cannabis-violence/
-
How exactly does prudent behaviour when driving segue into cannabis prohibition? Wouldn't health promotion and social messaging work without having to criminalise cannabis?: https://www.familyfirst.org.nz/2019/05/random-roadside-drug-testing-must-be-urgently-introduced/
-
andin, in reply to
Family First is now trying to link cannabis with psychotic episodes.
They really went out of their way to find those examples. A lot are behind paywalls and one I see was just people filling in questionnaires, so not all that reliable. But scaremongering none the less. Whats a lobby group to do, but drag stats out of the woodwork and make it look as if the world will descend into madness.
I thought we had Donald Trump for that!How exactly does prudent behaviour when driving segue into cannabis prohibition?
Via faulty reasoning thru sensationalism and a very male machismo outlook that whispers to the thinker, they must save people from themselves and ban stuff they dont approve of, or outside their norm.
-
-
andin, in reply to
Haha snap
My Thanks to Joe and Allison for that -
Joe Boden, in reply to
Haha snap
My Thanks to Joe and Allison for thatAt about 10.30 this morning my office phone rang. It was Bob McKoskrie, and he was not in a good mood.
-
andin, in reply to
Haha Im sure. I just hope he learned something from the conversation. Though that does take a willingness to admit when you are mistaken in a belief and Im not sure he has that ability, but I dont know the man personally.
-
FamF Alert. Ben Cort is one of the featured speakers at Family First’s Forum on the Family (sic) bigotfest. Here’s the blurb:
"Ben Cort is from Colorado and is the author of Weed, Inc.: The Truth About the Pot Lobby, THC, and the Commercial Marijuana Industry, released in September 2017. His passion for recovery, prevention and harm reduction comes from his own struggle with substance abuse. Sober since June 15, 1996, Ben has been a part of the recovery community in almost every way imaginable – from a recipient to a provider to a spokesperson. Ben has a deep understanding of the issues and a personal motivation to see the harmful effects of drug and alcohol abuse minimised. Ben’s Ted-X talk in 2017, What commercialisation is doing to cannabis, has had more than 1.6 million views! Ben recently visited New Zealand, speaking to community leaders, politicians and media.
TOPIC: An interview with Bob McCoskrie – What NZ Needs To Understand About The Marijuana Debate”
Forum on the Family will be held at Sir Noel Robinson Conference Centre (behind the Vodafone Events Centre)
770 Great South Rd, Wiri, Manukau 2104Time: Friday 5th July 8.45 am- 4.45 pm
Post your response…
This topic is closed.