Archive for the ‘Drug-related crime’ Category

Shapelle Corby on LawFuel

December 29, 2009

This case exemplifies all that is wrong with the international drug covenants and conventions to which New Zealand is a signatory.

Recent hangings in South East Asia, firing squads in China, and most recently two Kiwi’s arrested (and presumed guilty) for 3.5oz of cannabis between them in India, (the home of Ganja, a plant named as sacred along with the river Ganges) all happen because we as a nation collectively give licence to kill and incarcerate cruelly and inhumanely.

Where is the legal profession on drug policy?

Or is the substantial legal aid grift and perpetual social mayhem an incentive for a silence closely resembling stupidity? NZ’s own National Drug Intelligence Bureau chief along with the BERL Drug Harm report (though much criticised) states that the revenue ‘churn’ through the legal system is a DRUG HARM.

The LEGAL profession are beneficiaries of the unintended consequences. So when are you collectively going to talk about that?

To the Law Commission? Yeah Right!

Curiously, in Christchurch’s sister city Seattle, it was the law profession that lead drug policy law reform. see King County Bar Association – http://www.kcba.org/druglaw/

“The principal objectives of this effort are: reductions in crime and public disorder; improvement of the public health; better protection of children; and wiser use of scarce public resources.”

sig Blair Anderson, Christchurch. 027 2657219
http://www.leap.cc http://mildgreens.blogspot.com

A slight rise in drug crime (Sallies)

March 12, 2009
SAN FRANCISCO - DECEMBER 19:  Two year-old Van...

Image by Getty Images via Daylife

A slight rise in drug crime

Drug offences rose slightly between 2007 and 2008 from 18,908 in 2007 (year ending 30 June) to 19,259 in 2008. Within this overall rise there was a shift in the composition of these offences with more Cannabis related offences (14,449 to 15,288) and fewer offences for other and most often harder, drugs (4,450 to 3,971). Overall the level drug related crime is 13% lower in 2008 than in 2004 when there were 22,249 drug offences of which 18,271 were Cannabis related.

see FIGURE 20: Convictions for drug offences 2004-2008

http://www.salvationarmy.org.nz/uploads/IntoTroubledWaters.pdf

Notably the Salvation Army says in its summary (Report Card)

For the available data it is difficult to know if the war on illicit drugs is being won or lost. The recent rise in cannabis related offences may indicate a changing emphasis by Police.

New Zealand Police Special Tactics Groupd duri...Cannabis Harm Reduction Squad
on route to saving someone
from themselves.

Image via Wikipedia

[Actually the heading is perverse, there was a significant reduction in drug crime (13% lower) but the figures demonstrate that ‘Policing Success’ is entirely dependent on measuring cannabis convictions and thus policing practice, not prevalence of use or relative harm. The BERL Drug Harm Index report is all the more sillier! /Blair ]

Related articles by Zemanta


Paradis On Hammers, Airguns and Reason

September 14, 2008

Drugs should be decriminalised and regulated

The shooting of Sergeant Don Wilkinson and the hammer homicide of John John Hapeta were unnecessary crimes. Blair Mulholland explains why here.

(http://nominister.blogspot.com/2008/09/drugs-should-be-decriminalised-and.html)

They were crimes that resulted directly out of the prohibition of drugs. With Wilkinson, the facts are relatively clear. The circumstances as I understand them surrounding the death of Hapeta are that he was starting out selling Cannabis and the two youths who murdered him were “protecting their patch”.

One would lose count of the number of burglaries committed, or the number of cars stolen, or the aggravated robberies committed each year in order solely for the offenders to obtain cash to purchase prohibited drugs on the black market. The prohibition of drugs, whether they’re called recreational or whatever label attaches, not only does not work, it in fact makes society more dangerous and unsafe. If we want a safer and crime-reduced country then all drugs should be decriminalised and regulated immediately. The regulation can occur through the sale by government controlled stores. These stores would be a monopoly and they would not be allowed to advertise.

Those are my beliefs. They are also the view of Judge Jerry Paradis who is in New Zealand to present to a government ministry on drug prevention. Judge Paradis is a member of LEAP (Law Enforcement Against Prohibition) and was a Canadian District Judge for 28 years. He’s seen it all.

During his lecture at AUT on Friday he spoke of how during his bench service, the supply side of illegal drugs increased hugely yet the number of addicts stayed relatively stable: the increase of drugs did not result in more drug problems. Of course that is because individuals are able to decide for themselves that drugs are bad news and the increase in their supply didn’t mean humans weren’t able to choose not to use them.

Judge Paradis described how the drive to take drugs was innate and therefore there will always be demand to match the supply. The LeDain Report, a Canadian Government commissioned report in 1972, was the most extensive report ever undertaken in Canada on the prohibition of drugs whose thesis was that the criminal law is the least effective way to deal with drug issues. In New Zealand during the last two weeks we have seen just that.

A better example of the way prohibition has conclusively and demonstrably failed is the USA. One of the most morally righteous countries in the World decided to “get tough on drugs” during the Nixon era [1968-1976]. The odd reasoning behind it was that drugs are bad for you and your health and well-being. The USA decided to “deal” with the inevitable social and health problems caused by drug abuse by invoking the criminal law. It has spent between then and now approximately $US 1,000,000,000,000.00 [One Trillion dollars] on the issue. The Drug Enforcement Agency budget in 1971 was $75 million dollars. In 2001 it was $1.6 Billion. As a result of this “war on drugs” drug arrests quadrupled and the percentage of prison inmates committed for drug offences increased from 26% in 1973 to 56% in 2001. Yet the drug ‘problem’, and of course related crime problems, have got worse. Prohibition has failed.

What prohibition does is this:

1. It creates a black market – approximately $500 Billion per annum worldwide and gives enormous profits for the drug cartels;
2. Property crime, violent crime and other violent crime (all known as drug related crime) increases;
3. There is no quality control over the drugs being taken: who knows what that white pill contains;
4. It is a tremendous drain on police, court and justice resources.

In short, the cost of prohibition is exorbitant. It is unnecessary. It is draining. All of these reasons are why, in New Zealand, drugs should be decriminalised and regulated.

Judge Paradis stated that during his time on the Bench, 60% of the crimes that came before him were drug prohibition crimes. That can be reduced overnight by decriminalising and regulating drugs.

Section 4 of New Zealand’s Sale of Liquor Act is a relevant starting point for the policy prescription. It says:

The object of this Act is to establish a reasonable system of control over the sale and supply of liquor to the public with the aim of contributing to the reduction of liquor abuse, so far as that can be achieved by legislative means.


Perfect.

Section 4 acknowledges control over the supply; has the aim of contributing to the reduction of abuse; but only so far as that can be achieved by the law.

That is what the crux is. The criminal law can only achieve so much in dealing with drug prohibition crimes. The two recent murders highlight that the level of muchness is in fact very low.

Let’s forget about being precious on this issue and face reality: prohibition is an abject failure.

Let’s get some personal responsibility back into people’s lives. Let’s face it, if ‘P’ was decriminalised and its supply regulated overnight would you go and buy some tomorrow? Most would answer ‘NO’ because it’s bad shit. The ones who would can be helped through medicine, not handcuffs.

More at: http://www.drugwarodyssey.com

BERL’s BoonDoggle

June 25, 2008

Lysergic acid diethylamideOne could send NZ’s entire
LSD ‘problem’ (10gms) in
one envelope via NZ Post!
and Dogs couldnt even smell it!
Hardcore drugs P, cocaine and Ecstasy gave New Zealand a bill of about $546 million for social costs in one financial year. (Ecstacy “hardcore”, who are these guys kidding, this is proof Accountants should stay away from drugs)

They are a big part of the total $1.3 billion that drug use cost the country in 2005 and 2006.
The figures come from a new index designed by economists to help police decide where drugs do the most harm and enable them to use resources more efficiently.

The Drug Harm Index, released yesterday, will help police determine the socio-economic costs from drug seizures and track the value of the drug trade in New Zealand. (this is laughable – “it amounts in reality to harms from prohibition in dollars per kilo/Blair)

It measures social harms related to drug use such as lost work output, health service use, diverted resources and reduced quality or loss of life. (it does not measure all harms , it does identify a state service that is forbidden from lying, telling lies. This has the signature of CZAR Anderton all over it, and he calls me dangerous!/Blair)

The study investigated harm caused by four drug categories – stimulants (methamphetamine or “P”, cocaine and Ecstasy), opioids (opium, homebake heroin and morphine), cannabis (plants and plant extracts) and LSD (hallucinogens).

It found that 373,310 people used cannabis, but only 17 per cent of these were frequent users.
(evidence of law in disrepute/Blair)

There were 38,390 cocaine users, of which 88 per cent were frequent users.

Nearly 23,000 people used crystal methamphetamine (36 per cent of them often) and 81,890 took Ecstasy (24 per cent often). (How come?, I thought these substances were prohibited? Doesnt the policy work? – Idiots!)

Cannabis was the most used drug by far. At the other end of the scale, LSD use was limited to 2.6 times a year on average.

Men who took drugs were absent from work about 70 per cent more days than abstainers, and women 20 per cent more days. (This is unsupported by evidence that shows cannabis users take less sick days than joe public and on average had a higher mean income/Blair)

Male cannabis users took about 8 per cent more sick days than the average male worker and opioid users took 40 per cent more days. (and alcohol/tobacco ??? you twerps! )

Other findings were:
* Cannabis cost $431 million, opioids $326 million and LSD $7.1 million.
* The most damaging drug per kilogram was LSD, which cost more than $1.05 billion a kg (ROFLOL – do the homework here, $7million/1.05billion – BERL reckons NZ’s LSD ‘problem amounts to a total of about 10gms, or about a third of an ounce )
* About 1578 people – 16 per cent of the prison population – were in jail as a result of drug-related crimes. This was at a cost of about $68,880 per person – $108.7 million in total.
* Court costs were $353 million.
* People serving community sentences cost $20.9 million and those on home detention cost $300,000.
* Hospital costs attributed to patients with drug-related problems amounted to $6.76 million – an average of about $2949 for each of 2292 patients. (Health Costs attributable to Alcohol may be as much as 70% of the total health vote according to UK NHS – Illicit drugs are cheap!)
* There were about 1920 drug-related deaths (including road accidents and homicides), costing $205.2 million, or $106,000 a person (non-of-which can be scientifically thus evidentially attributed to cannabis/Blair)
While stimulants contributed 41 per cent of the total costs, figures showed that in 2006, police and Customs seized 33,480kg of cannabis compared with only 155kg of stimulants. (not bad eh, 33 tonnes of cannabis!, NZ smokes its way through more than 200 tonnes a year and no one died! Doh!)

And police dealing with drug offences spent 55.8 per cent of their time addressing cannabis, against 43 per cent of their hours dealing with stimulant-related issues. (demonstrating what a massive waste of resources prohibition of cannabis is)

Former police detective Mike Sabin, who now specialises in dealing with P users, said police should dedicate as many resources to drug offences as they did to road policing. (what is he suggesting, Random Footpath Checks? )

He said police and the Government had made an effort to reduce road accidents over the past 10 years. “We’ve seen a halving of the road toll in that time …If we saw the same level of policing on drugs I think we’d see a significant reduction in the costs identified in this report.” (absent any proof this is pure speculation – he’s making it up as he goes – the guy is an idiot if he believes that somehow suddenly NZ Police can do what billions of dollars has failed to accomplish, keep taking the pills Mike!, it should help with the delusions.)

Police had started to steer away from drug and organised crime policing, possibly because it was costing too much, clogged up the courts and created statistics that would not exist unless you “went out and found the drugs”, Mr Sabin said. (not while the Police ‘budgets’ for drug interdiction remained an unaccountable cash cow that Mr Sabin is all to ready to suck the tit of)

Police spent about 4 per cent of their time working on drug-related offences, the index showed.
National crime manager Detective Superintendent Win van der Velde told the police Ten One magazine a reduction in social costs since 2000 showed drug seizures in 2006 avoided $485 million of drug harm. (hahahahhaahaaa! your joking… Operation VeeDub cost millions to prosecute and the guys walked! )

“This index holds the potential for police to become more targeted and responsive to areas of crime where greater harm occurs.”

(This is even funnier. Perhaps he’s going to disband the Expert Advisory Committe (on Drugs) for lying to the public about drug harms! Mr Sabin calls himself “Methcon”, is that some kind of cruel joke?)

The study did not include party pills such as benzylpiperazine (BZPs), which were reclassified as Class C drugs from April 1. (Contrary to best practice public health – they reclassified because [Czar] Jim Anderton paid for the research outcomes he wanted to see)

Such appaling ‘cost benefit analysis’ is a drug offence!

Blair Anderson

Zemanta Pixie