Australian Politics Forum - Illegalization of products which mimic pot

Emma Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 9853 OZ Gender:	Re: Illegalization of natural products which mimic pot Reply #15 - Jun 18^th, 2011 at 1:37am Yeah -- I'll ask my local tobacconist next time I'm down that way! They sell Bongs and accoutrements, so ought to know? Funny that -- it was MADE ILLEGAL to sell Bongs etc - I think - .......... and they became unseen, .........but not for long. Its a crazy world.
Back to top	live every day IP Logged

stonehenge

New Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2

Re: Illegalization of natural products which mimic pot
Reply #16 - Jun 20^th, 2011 at 5:35pm

Ok, What I'd like to know now is this:

With this new legislation, as ignorant as it is, if say someone had, WHILE all this hullabaloo was pending and indeed long before it was mentioned (a week prior), purchased a quantity of legal products that were not plant based but instead the portion of blended material that made it potent, and were to be caught with it being delivered in WA, would said person risk prosecution.

It was legal, it had no problem entering this state let alone the country - PRIOR to all this.

Should this person be wary? Is there retrospective implication?

Bob bought about 8 grams of a chemical. It was legal. This legislation makes bob a criminal should he procure this after it becomes illegal. He has not.

Is bob going to be going to gaol for 20 years, thanks to colin and made up legislation? Or be hounded by the legal system to make a point?

Bob doesnt do anything. He's a fuggen hippy.

But bob will be very angry should customs knock on his door.

Back to top

IP Logged

Emma

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 9853
OZ
Gender: female

Re: Illegalization of natural products which mimic pot
Reply #17 - Jun 20^th, 2011 at 8:51pm

Interesting question - and one with broader application.

I don't believe the legislation can act retrospectively. IF Bob paid for the 'product' at point of sale, not receipt, and there is record of said completed contractual transaction, Bob should not be prosecuted, provided he can substantiate same. 'Should not'- means squat tho really.

There's the rub. And - he is likely ( definitely) to have the product confiscated.!!
Thats my opinion.

,

Back to top

live every day

IP Logged

Emma Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 9853 OZ Gender:	Re: Illegalization of natural products which mimic pot Reply #18 - Jun 22^nd, 2011 at 1:51am how about puppets that mimic people? A Few Folk com to mind?[email][/email] I really want to post some ?/ stuff on this board, and FD sauid do this and that - I am not getting anywhere. Could someone - just assume that I have never don anything like such a transfer before?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Back to top	live every day IP Logged

Emma

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 9853
OZ
Gender: female

Re: Illegalization of natural products which mimic pot
Reply #19 - Jun 22^nd, 2011 at 2:03am

oooooppppppppppps aginn

wrong button......... but yeah ??

anyone? saved vids etc from e-m to :C - OK? Then what???

Tried image button above ( to be really specific - thats the friggin' little piccie inside the BOX LEFT of the E-MAIL BOX).
I had a reply open - you can see what happened.
What do I do to get something I received either in vid or stills, onto a topic on this forum??????

Make no assumptions!!!!!!!!!!.
Good night.!!! Roll Eyes

OK OK failed again - seems I have to convert the frickin' WMV to a fireakin'!!!!JPEG or such.

OK calm down - now I really know why I dislike this poo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Smiley

Back to top

live every day

IP Logged

Amadd

Gold Member

Offline

Mo

Posts: 6217

Re: Illegalization of natural products which mimic pot
Reply #20 - Jun 23^rd, 2011 at 8:44am

From what I can see, the purported problems with these "marijuana mimicing" products, are the very same problems (with marijuana) that have not been proven to be a problem in any greater respect than most of the "accepted" drugs in circulation today.

I think that we're trapped into some sort of inane logic which dictates that if it causes pain, then it must be "good" in the long run, and if it feels good, then it must have some drawback which must be suppressed and controlled ....duty now for the future of all idiots!

We're = US

Us = DEMOCRACY.

Did we forget that our vote means everything?.. I think we have forgotten.

You want to be very careful in your acceptance of what a "classified drug" is, because if you do not make a choice, then the choice will be made for you.i

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jun 23^rd, 2011 at 8:53am by Amadd »

IP Logged

Emma Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 9853 OZ Gender:	Re: Illegalization of natural products which mimic pot Reply #21 - Jun 23^rd, 2011 at 5:22pm I say - Welll said Amadd
Back to top	live every day IP Logged

Amadd

Gold Member

Offline

Mo

Posts: 6217

Re: Illegalization of natural products which mimic pot
Reply #22 - Jun 29^th, 2011 at 4:53am

Thx Jalane.

So I've been doing a little research into this synthetic form of marijuana (I don't mind assuming myself as human guinea pig where I choose) and have found that the usual active chemical goes by the name of: "JB -018".
They also use others from the "JB" chemical range, which have been purposely developed (for research) to have a similar molecular structure as THC .... the active ingredient in marijuana of course.

In it's raw form, this chemical doesn't look like marijuana, so it's sprayed onto various herbs or plants and sold as a "herbal marijuana".

I'm not sure how the chemical got out of the research labs and into the mainstream, but it must be fairly simple to manufacture for an astute chemist.

IMO, this chemical has now come into prominance mainly because of our acceptance of random drug testing in the workplace and in public areas. This chemical is undetectable as a drug using current tests, so it's not surprising that it has become very popular these days.

I can see that my window of opportunity to test out these chemicals is closing rather sharply in this country.
I'd like to know if there are any ill effects before I settle on my current judgement of it being a very very nice product indeed.

It seems that these "JB" chemicals will be banned Australia-wide before the wider population gets a fighting chance to form judgement via the common vehicle of democratic opinion.

From the products I've tried thus far, I find it surprising as to how different the effects are considering the (so far) limited range of chemicals.
I like them all actually. They are all much better than dope IMO.
No munchies, no paranoia..a shorter, but a better high.

It's very diffferent to the pot that I've tried in the past. It's more like a fanciful strain of pot that I've been looking for and could not find. I've no doubt that this is an intention in the development of these chemicals.

So the governments are saying "NO" under the pretext of these chemicals doing whatever. They do whatever our governments imagine that they will do, and our governments pass the news onto us.

Quote:

In the end we will conserve only what we love. We will love only what we understand. We will understand only what we are taught - Baba Dioum

It's about time that we treated our governments as idiots. And it's about time that they were receptive to such an opinion.

Back to top

IP Logged

boogieman

Senior Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 307

Re: Illegalization of products which mimic pot
Reply #23 - Jun 30^th, 2011 at 7:54am

Amadd wrote on Jun 14^th, 2011 at 9:44am:

I have tried a couple of herbal (so called "incense") products which are supposed to mimic the effect of pot.., and they are very very good IMO.

In fact, I prefer them over pot if I were to choose.

But sorrowfully, that choice seems to have already been taken away before democratic judgement can be made.

W.A. health organizations are already banning these products without providing any rhyme or reason to their stance. ..except that the product does work, and it does gets you high.
Tasmania is soon to follow at the end of this month.

Are they right? If so, then why?

I don't know if that is a word really. Illegalisatiuon. But I know what you mean. Of course they are not RIGHT. They keep alcohol and tobacco legal and ban this stuff. It's wowsers who hate to see others enjoying themselves.

They make up stories about pot leading to harder drugs, depression and so on. That part is true for young people but once your brain has fully developed it has no such effect.

I haven't tried this stuff, been taking a break for a few years which I do always. I saw the announcer on TV freaking out about it because this stuff is supposedly as strong as hash.

Big deal, nothing wrong with hash either and it is not scary at all.

It's ignorance of course. Fear of the unknown. All drugs should be legal and controlled by chemists or doctors. Much safer, cheaper, no crime and taxes would be applicable. But they should ban booze as it's the big killer of all drugs.

Back to top

IP Logged

Amadd

Gold Member

Offline

Mo

Posts: 6217

Re: Illegalization of products which mimic pot
Reply #24 - Jul 2^nd, 2011 at 2:26am

It is a word, but I usually try to slip in a "z" (pronounced "zed") instead of an "s" where I can.

To my knowledge, there is no legislation against these chemicals in Victoria as of yet.
Of course there is pressure for all states to follow the lead of the big mining states, because, well, they own the money and they don't like the ease in which these products can cross thier borders if all states do not follow suit.
To that I say: "Then you must be considering yourselves as something other than a state within the nation of Australia." How dare they!

So far, I see the Victorian liberal "Baillieu" government as having a common sense approach in stating that they want to see where the problem lies before attempting to pass new legislation.

Existing rhetoric contends that these chemicals have destroyed entire communities. They cause paranoia, mental problems, etc etc.

I think that we should not lower ourselves into strawman arguments when the wider public who have experienced these chemicals first hand would almost unanimously disagree with such devisive rhetoric.

There is simply no reliable proof out there that these chemicals cause a danger in the workplace or in the wider public that they may cause one to fall outside of the "accepted" range of competency standards.
The same may be said of the chemical (THC) that these chemicals are designed to mimic.
I'm probably helping to build the strawman argument by nominanting these products as "chemicals", because there is a certain opinion attached to that word. But just about any substance in existence holds some sort of innate chemical reaction.

"The problem", IMO, is that it's all too hard for governments to control.

It's all too hard for them to reliably ascertain which chemical might cause more danger than another. It's much simpler to ban all those which are too hard to control, and to keep the natives happy by allowing some of those which may be far more harmful, but they are easier to control.

I'd hope that the majority of people will require some sort of concrete proof of the disavantages to society before "legally" stopping people from getting high at their leisure and their own personal adult choice.

Maybe it's just not fair that other people should be allowed some "Happy times"?

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jul 3^rd, 2011 at 3:42am by Amadd »

IP Logged

Amadd

Gold Member

Offline

Mo

Posts: 6217

Re: Illegalization of products which mimic pot
Reply #25 - Jul 3^rd, 2011 at 3:15am

I see that the Ballieu government is now employing the pretentious phrase of "Uniform drug laws"...haha.
Now that's an easy out if ever I saw one.
I shoulda known that "weakness" was the primal force behind their dilly- dallying on this issue.

No, they don't care a continental about real studies concerning the real impact upon cognetive function.
In their magnificent and infinite wisdom, they deduce that if it gets one "high", then cognetive function must be reduced. Even more than the unnatural effects of working too hard and long throughout ridiculous shifts......so they say Roll Eyes

I would be guilty of building a "strawman" to assume that this is the argument that they are using as a pretext to outlaw a product that a lot of people like and find useful.
But alas, I haven't heard any rational argument whatsoever as to why all state governments would simultaneously come to the conclusion that there is a problem in the community soley due to these products.
I know that they are telling some very large porkies there.

The truth, is that there have been no real studies done into the impact or "de-impact" upon the wider community.
Personally, I find the product very useful to curb my alcohol addiction which has been brought about by peer pressure, advertising, and immoral tax-grabbing governments that sell out our health and free choice for money. Money for themselves, not the wider community.

I want every opportunity that I can get to survive and to live a free and healthy life which reflects my own personal choices.
"Productive" - I don't give a stuff about. That's somebody else's want for me. If I end up being "productive", then all well and good.

Let's be serious. Outrageous fines and threats to everything that we have worked for will make even the most ardent maverick fall into line with even the most "Reichstag-like" assaults upon the democratic process.
We cower to these unrealistic threats from our government(s) every day of the week- even though we know in our heart of hearts that we are doing nothing wrong to deserve to be threatened in such a dictatorial manner.

If I were to be slapped with a $25,000 fine today for being in possesion of that which was legal yesterday, then doesn't that seem a little odd?
Wouldn't that seem to be a "cruel and unusual punishment", as outlined against in our version of a constitution?

Why the sudden shift? Was there some sort of tsunami of communal problems which suddenly eventuated due to this product?
I haven't seen it. And I'll lay odds that you haven't (and would never) seen it either.

The Baillieu government quoted that they would need to define the problem before attempting to pass legislation.
They now seem to have "defined" the problem. Any chance that we might be let in on this little secret?

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/synthetic-pot-gets-chop-20110615-1g3yf.html

The above editorial claims that the product is openly available to children as young as ten. That is a lie. The vast majority of sellers assume personal responsibility to ensure that buyers are over the age of 18.
There's other lies in tht article also. The synthetic product does not contain THC, the so-called active ingredient.
Ohhh, it's such a big problem to not be dectable to substances which are assumed to sacrifice cognetive function ....Why didn't God bless those idiots with a pair of eyes?

But it's all fine and dandy for industries to sell "tartrazine" (amongst so many other chemicals) to kids as young as four. That's the additive chemical that kids go crazy about in red cordial...they love it.
You love it too Grin

I can display facts and tell our government some very real dangers of "tartrazine". Can they tell me the dangers of what they are very heavily banning now?
I could display a veritable library on the harmfulness of just one single chemical that has been fed to us and our kids (maybe even as young as two). There are many many problems with widely used "accepted" chemicals that have been backed by some real studies.
Tartrazine: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Tartrazine_and_ADHD/

As a plebeian voter, I'm not important enough to be told. And neither are you.i

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jul 3^rd, 2011 at 4:17am by Amadd »

IP Logged

Amadd Gold Member Offline Mo Posts: 6217	Re: Illegalization of products which mimic pot Reply #26 - Jul 5^th, 2011 at 9:00am But I'll enjoy my "happy times", whilst they last. And before I am once again condemned to the capitalist drugs which have always seemed to hinder me. If you are a white male caucasian, you'd be safer to accept that you are a neo-slave to oblivion.
Back to top	IP Logged

O)))

Full Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 153
Gender: male

Re: Illegalization of natural products which mimic pot
Reply #27 - Jul 28^th, 2011 at 9:39am

... wrote on Jun 14^th, 2011 at 10:40am:

[quote author=ID999 link=1308008665/0#0 date=1308008664]
The west australian has been banging away on it for a few months now, the only 'harm' that has come from the substance is that it can't be detected by standard D & A testing.

Implying that these synthetic cannabis strains are harmless is not entirely true. There have been rather disturbing anecdotal reports regarding the consumption of K2 and JWH-018. I have heard of many people complaining of having bad, persistent headache for weeks/days after use and another report of somebody slipping into a coma after smoking the K2 blend.

Personally, I'd rather smoke some normal weed instead of these synthetic blends. They have not been around long enough to study any long-term effects. Until we have a greater knowledge about these blends and their possible long-term effects I will be steering clear of them.

Back to top

IP Logged

...

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 23673
WA
Gender: male

Re: Illegalization of natural products which mimic pot
Reply #28 - Jul 28^th, 2011 at 10:09am

O))) wrote on Jul 28^th, 2011 at 9:39am:

... wrote on Jun 14^th, 2011 at 10:40am:

[quote author=ID999 link=1308008665/0#0 date=1308008664]
The west australian has been banging away on it for a few months now, the only 'harm' that has come from the substance is that it can't be detected by standard D & A testing.

Implying that these synthetic cannabis strains are harmless is not entirely true. There have been rather disturbing anecdotal reports regarding the consumption of K2 and JWH-018. I have heard of many people complaining of having bad, persistent headache for weeks/days after use and another report of somebody slipping into a coma after smoking the K2 blend.

Personally, I'd rather smoke some normal weed instead of these synthetic blends. They have not been around long enough to study any long-term effects. Until we have a greater knowledge about these blends and their possible long-term effects I will be steering clear of them.

I too didn't try them - why bother when you've got a free supply of the real deal?
But I guess my attitude was swayed by seeing it all unfold - watching how the story progressed left me with little doubt that this ban was orchestrated on economic grounds, not on public health grounds. I concede that it's highly likely that at least 1 of the blends would have some side effects - but not necessarily the belnds that were banned.

Back to top

In the fullness of time...

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 48814 At my desk.	Re: Illegalization of products which mimic pot Reply #29 - May 2^nd, 2018 at 10:25am *This Topic was moved here from Drug Policy* by freediver.**
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged