Cannabis debate
-
@Godder said in Cannabis debate:
@Paekakboyz said in Cannabis debate:
Seems highly (ahem) likely it's not going to get over the line. A real opportunity missed but I wonder if folks just have far too much going on for this to really get the level of debate and discussion. Covid, general election, end of life, Covid, ... did I mention Covid?
There were a lot of people who just voted no because "cannabis bad", and no amount of logic or facts was going to change that.
I think Cannabis is bad for people, but voted 'yes'. Lesser of two evils. But there wasn't a lot of debate or discussion on it - drowned out as @Paekakboyz said, by Covid, covid, elections and euthansia
-
@chimoaus said in Cannabis debate:
I was in the Police for many years. I remember one bloke, heavy meth user, broke into 30+ houses, in and out of Jail. He got out and disappeared off our radar, I thought he must have moved or died.
About 6 months later I run into him at the Supermarket. He has work boots, pants etc on and looked completely different. He spotted me and I made small talk with him. I Said "haven't seen you around" He said, "I'm too bloody tired after work to break into houses."
So after hours upon hours chasing him, going to court, years in jail. All he needed was a job.
I honestly believe the key to reducing offending is education, employment, strong family and social connections.
All the dependent drug users I engaged with couldn't have cared less about its legality. That made no difference whatsoever.
I am all for legalisation, if you want to reduce the harms of drugs you need to give people a reason not to become dependent on them in the first place. Plenty of people use alcohol responsibly and cannabis would be no different.
Great post
-
when will the results from the 2 referndums be out?
-
@taniwharugby said in Cannabis debate:
when will the results from the 2 referndums be out?
Apparently Friday is the new Thursday.
-
@MN5 what doesn't kill you gives you? ... grey hairs?! đ
I think its kind of crazy that we might pass on a change that could go someway s towards adddressing some massive, long term issues we've been banging our heads against. Potentially missing that boat grates more than being able to visit a weed shop or grow your own legally.
-
@nzzp said in Cannabis debate:
@Godder said in Cannabis debate:
@Paekakboyz said in Cannabis debate:
Seems highly (ahem) likely it's not going to get over the line. A real opportunity missed but I wonder if folks just have far too much going on for this to really get the level of debate and discussion. Covid, general election, end of life, Covid, ... did I mention Covid?
There were a lot of people who just voted no because "cannabis bad", and no amount of logic or facts was going to change that.
I think Cannabis is bad for people, but voted 'yes'. Lesser of two evils. But there wasn't a lot of debate or discussion on it - drowned out as @Paekakboyz said, by Covid, covid, elections and euthansia
I also voted yes. Two weeks to get the referenda results.
-
@Godder said in Cannabis debate:
@nzzp said in Cannabis debate:
@Godder said in Cannabis debate:
@Paekakboyz said in Cannabis debate:
Seems highly (ahem) likely it's not going to get over the line. A real opportunity missed but I wonder if folks just have far too much going on for this to really get the level of debate and discussion. Covid, general election, end of life, Covid, ... did I mention Covid?
There were a lot of people who just voted no because "cannabis bad", and no amount of logic or facts was going to change that.
I think Cannabis is bad for people, but voted 'yes'. Lesser of two evils. But there wasn't a lot of debate or discussion on it - drowned out as @Paekakboyz said, by Covid, covid, elections and euthansia
Two weeks to get the referenda results.
Why is that? Seems like a very long time. Are they fingerprinting all the âYesâ votes or something?
-
@JC said in Cannabis debate:
@Godder said in Cannabis debate:
@nzzp said in Cannabis debate:
@Godder said in Cannabis debate:
@Paekakboyz said in Cannabis debate:
Seems highly (ahem) likely it's not going to get over the line. A real opportunity missed but I wonder if folks just have far too much going on for this to really get the level of debate and discussion. Covid, general election, end of life, Covid, ... did I mention Covid?
There were a lot of people who just voted no because "cannabis bad", and no amount of logic or facts was going to change that.
I think Cannabis is bad for people, but voted 'yes'. Lesser of two evils. But there wasn't a lot of debate or discussion on it - drowned out as @Paekakboyz said, by Covid, covid, elections and euthansia
Two weeks to get the referenda results.
Why is that? Seems like a very long time. Are they fingerprinting all the âYesâ votes or something?
I'd be happier if it was tracing the 12000 who voted Advance NZ
-
@JC election night is a preliminary count so that NZ and the politicians can start planning and preparing based on those results, so only the election votes are counted. Over the weeks following, all the specials are checked for legality, and everything is then recounted.
The referendum is less important since it doesn't have a legal time frame to return the writs which is the legal foundation for MPs forming Parliament and subsequently the government.
It takes longer afterwards because there are a lot less staff than on election day.
-
@Godder said in Cannabis debate:
It takes longer afterwards because there are a lot less staff than on election day.
That job ...would be like being a cricket umpire without any decisions. Just counting to 6 (or 10), over and over and over again.
-
@nzzp said in Cannabis debate:
@Godder said in Cannabis debate:
It takes longer afterwards because there are a lot less staff than on election day.
That job ...would be like being a cricket umpire without any decisions. Just counting to 6 (or 10), over and over and over again.
Piles of 10 when I did it, and then someone else checking. The main decisions are what constitutes a valid vote.
-
@Godder So close, a real opportunity lost there. Can the Govt take the result that half the population are for it and let science and experts make the call going forward?
I can only assume if you did this 20 years ago it would have been 20% for, and likely in 5-10 years you will have more than 60% for. How long do Govt have to wait before they can make a call on this or is it out of bounds for a certain period?
-
@chimoaus scientists have no skin in the game. I love science, and think it's awesome, but that doesn't make them decision makers. Ultimately the shitty,ill educated masses have to decide what they want in their communities.
Gareth Morgan is an example of why science isn't always the answer. If you care about native birds, killing all cats makes sense. However, A LOT of people line their cats... How do you reconcile that?
So, yes to science, but yes to people making decisions who have accountability on tough decisions
-
@chimoaus said in Cannabis debate:
@nzzp Yeah fair call, how do you make an informed educated decision, or do you simply have to wait for public opinion to change as it likely will?
I voted yes, but if the majority arenât ready for legalisation thatâs fine.
Personally, I donât think this should be a referendum at all. We elect politicians to make decisions, even unpopular ones. We did it with prostitution and that turned out well.
-
@Kirwan said in Cannabis debate:
@chimoaus said in Cannabis debate:
@nzzp Yeah fair call, how do you make an informed educated decision, or do you simply have to wait for public opinion to change as it likely will?
I voted yes, but if the majority arenât ready for legalisation thatâs fine.
Personally, I donât think this should be a referendum at all. We elect politicians to make decisions, even unpopular ones. We did it with prostitution and that turned out well.
good call fella. I was a 'yes' voter, but not at all pro cannabis. It's just less harm.
... and now I agree with the Greens on something. Love 2020 eh
-
On anything apart from National Sovereignty issues and voting reform, I tend to think Referendums are an expensive waste of time.
In Representative Democracies, politicians should be prepared to make tough, not always popular, decisions and then be accountable to the electorate for them.