Australia proposes ban on 1000s of plants including national flower

Originally posted by Slipdig1
reply to post by moonpie86

 

Oh Okay attack me, I'm just one of the people you need to support this, but you go ahead and put me down. No I'm just saying that I have heard nothing of this, can only find articles on it in other forums or one newspaper which it all relates to GardenFreedom. Are you the same person that has started threads about this on multiple other sites. I mean it is plastered thick.

Your link won't work for me either, so that is just making me more suspicious. Why instead of fighting the whole illegalisation thing, why would you just not ask for people to only be convicted when they are producing, growing or selling '___', or when it can be proven the plants are for use with this?

It not like ol' bessie with her fifty wattles in her backyard is likely to be, secretly constructing a '___' lab in her back yard.

People aren't just getting a couple of leaves and ash, and chewing anymore. They are breaking down these plants and making it like a pharmaceutical drug.

Also '___' is sacred in Australia to the Aborigines, taken this when you are not Aboriginal in this way, without permission and without ceremony is very rude.

I think you have an Ulterior motive, you don't seem to have even considered this. I think you don't want them to make '___' a criminal offence. I'm sorry to say it already is.

edit on 8-3-2011 by Slipdig1 because: one word

I think you should consider who is attacking who here.
Why are you so intent to believe this is not happening. I am not sure why I cannot get the link to go on here. I will try reposting it a different way, or maybe you could follow my facebook link as the link the government page is on the wall.

My only purpose and intention here is to raise awareness for this cause. I do not think that nature needs to be destroyed in order to control a MINORITY group of people that choose to use/sell/distribute drugs. You will also find on the facebook page that it does not endorse dmt being used as a recreational drug.

If this legislation goes through it will make it harder for scientists/botanists etc. to gain access to these plants. Are you aware of what gets prescribed at your local doctors surgery to kids/teenager/adults every day? Are you aware of the crap that is in your water? You will find that alot of these plants have been studied for MEDICINAL purposes. This legislation could impact on the progress of this field.
Where I have typed in the dots, do not type them into your address bar and it should show up for you. There is the slash between au/www. This page also has the discussion documents attached.
www.ag.gov.au........./www/agd/agd.nsf/Page/Consultationsreformsandreviews_ConsultationonimplementationofmodeldrugschedulesforCommonwealthseriousd rugoffences

Like I said previously, I really hope that you find the truth for yourself, and join the cause.
Positivity NOW!

The aboriginees must be very with my brain then for getting me high on dmt everyday! Naturally :p

No disrespect intended Have a great night

reply to post by moonpie86


Of course I know that studying plants, has bought many great things into this world, don't try to patronise me, that will get you no where with me.

I will follow your facebook link, that means I have to join to see it, but any way.

Can you also answer my question: Are you the person that has plastered this all of the web, in many different forums? Also have you any connection to the website gardenfreedom?

Ima free agent

I found out about it here, did some investigation and just kinda dedicated myself to it. Created the page because nobody knew what I was talking about to spread awareness.
I guess sometimes you get sick of people accusing you of your intentions for spreading the truth.

reply to post by moonpie86


1. Even though I have great respect for the aboriginal citizens of this world in every continent, they don't own or control the natural seeds of the land any more than TPTB think they do.

2. Many of these plants that are being "destroyed" for the '___' could be farmed, or grown.

3..This has to do with controllers, and no one has that right. The whole concept of disenfranchising people from their natural right to land, homes, food production, seeds, minerals is Treason against the sovereignity of people, Slavery and Extortion

These are questions that the Minister would like answered in submissions.

Question B
(i) If the model controlled drug schedule was adopted in Commonwealth legislation, should the
distinction between controlled and border controlled drugs be maintained?
(ii) If so, should all of the substances currently listed in the model controlled drug schedule be
included in both the controlled drug and border controlled drug tables in Division 314 of
the Criminal Code?
(iii) If so, should the trafficable amounts (as currently prescribed in the model schedule) be
increased to be commensurate with the current marketable quantities for border controlled
drugs in the Criminal Code?

Question C
(i) Should there be further amendment to the extended definition provisions for model
controlled drug and controlled precursor lists to ensure that substances are listed as either
a controlled drug or a controlled precursor, and not both?
(ii) If so, where a substance fits both the extended definition of a precursor and the extended
definition of a drug, should it be dealt with as a drug and therefore attract higher penalties?
(iii) Are there circumstances in which a substances fitting the extended definitions of precursors
and drugs should be dealt with as a precursor?
(iii) Is the proposed definition of controlled drug appropriate in relation to both the named
substances and the extended definition of associated forms of the named drugs?

Question D
(i) Are the specified pure quantities for controlled drugs in the model schedules appropriate?
(ii) Is there a benefit in specifying pure quantities for other controlled drugs in addition to the
17 already specified?
(iii) Is there a benefit in specifying either a pure quantity or a quantity in a mixture, or both?

Question E
(i) Is an expanded list of plants appropriate for use in relation to plant offences?
(ii) Given the Intergovernmental Committee on Drugs resolution, should khat be omitted from
the model schedules?

Question G
Should the substances currently regulated by Customs Regulations be aligned with those in the
Criminal Code, if the Criminal Code was amended to include all of the substances listed in the
model controlled drug schedule?

Question H
(i) Is the extended definition of ‘precursor’ in the model schedule appropriate for both the
named substances and the wider group of associated forms of the named precursors?
(i) If not, is it necessary to introduce the concept of ‘immediate precursor’ in the extended
definition?
(iii) Are there substances that warrant specific inclusion in the definition of ‘precursor’,
notwithstanding that they are not in the model precursor schedule?
(iv) Is the current regulatory framework currently adequate to support the application of an
extended definition? What changes may be necessary?

Question I
Is it desirable to specify pure quantities for any particular precursors

Question J
(i) Is the current legislative structure in Part 9.1, incorporating detailed listings of substances
in Division 301, suitable to meet the needs of the current and emerging illicit drug market in
Australia?
(ii) If not, should there be amendment along the lines of either option (b) or (c) above?

Question K
(i) How should legitimate uses, for example medical, industrial or scientific uses, involving
consumption be protected?
(ii) Which substances, in addition to GBL, have legitimate medical, industry, scientific and
research applications which may require defences to be made available?
(iii) How should a legitimate use provision be constructed?

Question L
Does the model schedule of controlled plants create any problems of inadvertent criminalisation,
particularly in relation to the offence of selling a controlled plant within Australia?

Question M
(i) Does the expanded list create any problems of inadvertent criminalisation, particularly in
relation to controlled precursor offences?
(ii) Are legitimate users of controlled precursors sufficiently protected by the requirement for
the prosecution to prove intention or belief that a controlled precursor is to be used for the
manufacture of a controlled drug?
(iii) How should a further exception be framed for those legitimate users of controlled
precursors involved in the legitimate manufacture of controlled drugs?
(iv) Would an exemption be a more appropriate mechanism to protect legitimate users of
controlled precursors than a defence?

Well the legislation goes to parliment tomorrow.

Lets just hope that enough people have made it clear to them that it should never be allowed to be institutionalised.

My guess is, it will go trough because a mere bunch of emails and a petition nevet stopped a government (doing what it thinks is right in order to control the masses), before..lol

If they start contracting people to cut down all the Acacias in AU, you'll know that we failed...