So it seems party pills will be banned via an act of Parliament last night. Sellers have two weeks to close down; users have six months.
This is what happens in societies with little sense of discipline or self-control. Even though it ought to be up the individual whether or not they abuse their bodies or their minds, it ends up being enforced from above because many worry that their own children will not be able to resist the lure of the drug which "everyone" needs to have a good time at a party.
They must be pretty damn boring parties if people need drugs to enjoy them.
Related Link: Party pills go in fortnight ~ Stuff
This is what happens in societies with little sense of discipline or self-control. Even though it ought to be up the individual whether or not they abuse their bodies or their minds, it ends up being enforced from above because many worry that their own children will not be able to resist the lure of the drug which "everyone" needs to have a good time at a party.
They must be pretty damn boring parties if people need drugs to enjoy them.
Related Link: Party pills go in fortnight ~ Stuff
The same people saying that the banning of 'party' pills is an attack on their freedom to choose are the ones who complain when there is an adverse effect caused by a thoroughly tested medication and will critisize drug companies for using humans as guinea pigs.
ReplyDeleteThese 'party' pills are drugs and alter the way the body functions. If they had to be subjected to the same vigorous testing that say an anti-hypertensive had to undergo, they would not be allowed for human consumption. Furthermore these seedy 'makers' of the pills would have to foot the bill for testing the drug. Instead they are making money hand over fist - not for the benefit of the idiots who consume them - but at a risk to the consumers health.
The pills should not have been banned (criminalised), but have been made to go through the same process as alopathic medicines - and that would have taken the producers off the street.
It was out at dinner last night and I was surprised at the support of the ban.This is going down very well with the electorate.
ReplyDeleteWhen kids take party pills to Intermediate School and hand them out there is a problem- my daughters school sent out a letter about it. When libertines can show us they are used ONLY by adults then I will support legalisation.
Until then stoners on the internet who do not have to deal with teenage problems don't count.
There's usually a problem when kids start doing things that should only be done by adults, Ruth. The answer isn't banning adult activities.
ReplyDeleteWell said, PM.
ReplyDeleteFor someone who seems to take any criticism of John Key personally, Ruth, you're not above throwing it around yourself.
Opponents of more authoritarianism are 'stoners' and 'libertines', eh? Well, now.
They shouldn't even be "adult activities", PM. Taking party pills is stupid for kids and for adults.
ReplyDelete"Taking party pills is stupid for kids and for adults".
ReplyDeleteThat's a matter of opinion, Lucyna. It's one with which I happen to agree, but that's beside the point with regard to outlawing them. By banning the damn things you just create the proverbial black market - which makes matters so much worse. Still, the gangs will thank you for it!
Oh, and Ruth: I sincerely hope you and your gee-the-PP-ban's-a-good-idea companions weren't enjoying alcohol at your dinner party, because that would be just a wee bit hypocritical. Do as I say kids, etc.
Taking party pills is stupid for kids and for adults.
ReplyDeleteAs it happens I agree, Lucyna. There's no excuse for crap drugs, just as there's no excuse for crap music. That doesn't mean people who prefer crap music or drugs shouldn't have them though.
We should also ban the immoral adult acts of promiscuity and the obviously hurtful acts of alcohol abuse.
ReplyDeleteI'm thinking banning alcohol and some sort of bedroom police force.
While I share *some* sympathies with your conservative mindset you are up against human nature, quite like socialism. If people want to do drugs they will. Banning party pills won't stop them doing drugs... and kids/students are incredibly resourcful, they'll find another drug or experience to abuse and you're back to square one.
The real answer to all this is a lot deeper than banning something.
Although having never tried BZP, and probably never meeting someoen who has - you are more than happy to send them to jail for consumption.
ReplyDeleteVery interesting.
Tell me, would you support a ban of that mind altering drug Alcohol? You know, the one that is used in Holy Communion, the drug that *is* actually responsible for harm in New Zealand, including about 3% of all male deaths?
Or are you a bunch of tory hypocrites?
BTW, in my life time I've consumed my fair share of mind altering substance, some of which are Scheduled on the good old MODA...
ReplyDeleteNone of which has done any harm to myself or others, but quite a few which those who know nothing about said substances (pharmacologically or otherwise) probably think will bring on the legions of sodom and gomorrah!
Would you like to see me in jail, alongside kiddy fiddling priests and the like. Would you prefer that police time was wasted on me - or perhaps some real criminals, you know ... the type that rape, steal, murder and the like.
MikeE, wine is a food. Something we've forgotten in this age of more food around us than we can eat or drink. Wine and beer have developed over millennia as a means of storing (in a pleasurable way) fruit and grain crops. People who overindulge can have their inhibitions loosened, but it is not a substance used for the sole purpose of altering the mind. Neither is BZP either. I hear that it's very effective in killing worms. A bit over kill for humans don't you think?
ReplyDeleteRegardless of how you try and spin it, alcohol, and by definition wine, is a mind altering drug, one which we can readily acknowedge does far more societal harms than almost all other drugs put together.
ReplyDeleteSo yes, you are a bunch of hypocrits if you aren't going to take an equally strong stand on booze as other less harmful substances.
Oh and if you did a little bit of research, you'd find that while *a* piprazine was tested as a wormer in the 1950s, none of the piprazines used in legal party pills have ever been even tested as wormers (i.e. BZP, MeOPP, TFMPP etc).
Then again, somehow I doubt if you've ever actually been around BZP to form a proper judgement on it. Its far easier just to make decisions on it without knowing shit eh....
And another thing... BZP has no mind altering effects whatsoever, its a stimulant.
ReplyDeleteTFMPP and MeOPP on the other hand do.
Please, get your facts right, before you start spouing off ill informed rubbish. Or you'll start sounding like a labour voter.
My goodness, MikeE.
ReplyDeleteSuch a tantrum!
If you cannot have a civil conversation on this blog, I will start deleting your comments.
Take out all the emotive language and what do your comments actually say?
Let's see.
* wine and alcohol is still a mind-altering drug.
No it is not. The alcohol content of wine, beer, etc, are just a part of the whole thing. If you were talking about pure alcohol, you'd have a point - but no one drinks pure alcohol. In fact, it may even be illegal to sell it, but I'm not totally sure on that point.
Also, a large number of people drink alcoholic drinks without experiencing any mind altering effects, because they stop before they get to that point.
* alcohol causes a great deal of harm.
Only if consumed in large quantities. But this is not a reason to make it illegal. Because if you banned alcoholic drinks of any kind because some people drink too much, then you'd have to ban sugar because some people eat too much of that and so on and so on. Though I think the Greens are onto that with their latest thing on wanting to ban adds of junkfood to children. Far better to not let kids watch TV, that way they won't even see the ads.
* BZP was not tested as a wormer.
So? Apparently it was used as one. Maybe it was only for a while - I don't know. And I don't care.
* BZP is not a stimulant.
So what? It's an ingredient in party pills, is it not?
It seems to me that by fastening on these point and inflating their importance, you are doing what my kids do when they get upset. They focus on minor points, trying to show how "right" they are.
Hopefully you'll grow out of it as you get older. Maybe by the time you are 30. Maybe your comments will become politer at that point as well.
* we are a bunch of hypocrites.
Hmmmm, I think it appears that way because people such as yourself are too generalist in their thinking.
Party pills are not the same as alcoholic drinks, no matter how many times you jump up and down and say that they are because both are "mind-altering". It's really not convincing.
Its not a tantrum, its called destroying your poorly constructed argument, and the policy you support which seeks to criminalise a large part of the population for no good reason whatsoever, based on what is quite frankly, invented evidence.
ReplyDeleteYou are kidding yourself if you think that Alcoholic beverages are not drugs, and if you think most people consume it not to get drunk. I'll give you a big eye opener, people drink to get pissed - you might not, but the vast majority of kiwis "drink to get drunk". Don't believe me - take a trip to dunedin, or down the main street of Auckland on the weekend, or check out the local A and E on a sunday morning.
You are grossly understating the level of harm of alcohol, and inventing the harm caused by BZP. The facts don't lie.
According to Ministry of Health Data, alcohol is responsible for ~3% of male deaths annually. BZP has killed nobody.
Again I repeat, BZP is not a cattle wormer, not now, not ever. Other piprazines were, but not BZP, not any ingredient in any party pill on the market, or that has been on the market.
Actually I said BZP *is* a stimulant.
You haven't explained why you are not hypocrits.
You want to ban one drug, which is by and large relatively harmless, while your sacraments involve consuming another drug, which if it was scheduled under the Misuse of Drugs Act based on harm, it would be a class A or B drug (hence the review of the MODA by the law commission choosing not to include Alcohol in this review). To on one hand drink alcohol, while on the other hand supporting jail sentances for consumers of BZP is hypocrisy on a massive scale.
Again I ask, have you even seen a person on BZP in your life? Or is everything you write based on what you read in the paper?
Also - you avoided answering my question.
ReplyDeleteDo you think I should be in prison? I've got BZP in my possession right now.. and I've consumed it many times.
Would you feel safer, if I was in jail rather than contributing positively to society like I do now...
What if your kids had it... would you gladly send them to prison to?
I know thats what Ruth wants
It's a tough one for me, these party pills. I believe in personal responsibility. But while the Government shouldn't be interfering in people's lives, it is their job to keep law and order.
ReplyDeleteThat's why murder and methamphetamine are illegal.
I love Lucyna's comment, "They must be pretty damn boring parties if people need drugs to enjoy them."
MikeE. If you actually read what I wrote carefully, you would see that nowhere do I say that party pills ought to be banned. I also don't say they ought not to be banned. That I want them banned is an assumption you and others have made.
ReplyDeleteMy post was merely more a comment in passing on party pills being banned and wondering as to why people "needed" party pills to have a good time.
That is all.
Now, it seems to me that you on the other hand have made an argument here for the banning of alcoholic beverages.
I wouldn't have taken you for a prohibitionist.
My argument isn't for banning Booze, quite the opposite. My argument is for consistancy in the law and removing the drug snobbery that we have, where it ssocially acceptable to sell booze, (heck, it will et a nighthood).. yet its also ok for the govt to criminalise a large sector of the cmmunity, based on fabricated evidence.
ReplyDeleteNoone needs any drug to have a good time. That said, used responsibily and in moderation - they can make a good party a great one.
I'd still like to know whether you personally beleive I should be in jail or not for this horrible crime of consuming BZP. (not withstanding the law ot coming into effect untill april 1)
Do you think I should be in prison? I've got BZP in my possession right now.. and I've consumed it many times.
ReplyDeleteI think you have 6 months or so to use up your stash before you have to worry about that.
Maybe you need some sort of therapy as well, to help you have a good time with people without needing to take drugs in order to do so.
Losing the agro attitude would help too.
You're still avoiding the question.
ReplyDeleteDo you or do you not believe that I, or anyone else who has used party pills belongs in a prison.
And don't give me "oh but it will be illegal" nonsense. From an ethical point of view, do you believe that they should be sent to jail.
I do realise that if it isn't specificially mentioned in the bible that some on here might struggle with an answer... but surely after avoiding the question multiple times you can give a straight yes/no answer.
Though admittedly I haven't had a single person actually answer the question yet. All the cheerleaders for the ban like to conveniently te fact that a ban involves a prison sentance for a victimless crime.
It's not a victimless crime. The more people that jump up and down about the need for these sorts of drugs to be legal and freely available, the more young people that will think ergo the drugs must be ok to take. Look at what has happened with weed. It's considered harmless, yet there is a growing body of evidence showing that it is definitely not.
ReplyDeleteAnd no, I won't be answering your question.
Mike, give it up. They do sound like Labour voters.
ReplyDeleteIts either one way or the other way. Wine has killed more people than BZP but they are happy to allow the population to consume it and ban BZP. However I fear they want to ban it because they don't know enough about it while the effects of wine has been known for over a thousand years.
Ignorance is bliss :)
MikeE said: you are a bunch of hypocrits
ReplyDeleteHeine said: they do sound like Labour voters.
Who is "a bunch" and "they"? Given this is a group blog it would seem to be a fair assumption you are making unfounded generalisations on imaginary positions. Please, stick to facts.
Speaking of facts, you make a number of equivalences to alcohol and BZP and point out that alcohol kills more people. I haven't been following this debate and haven't formed an opinion on it at this point.
Can you please give me the following stats to clarify your claims:
1. Is BZP related product proven to be safe in any quantity?
2. What is the volume of alcohol consumed in NZ last year (and by how many people)?
3. What was the volume of BZP related product consumed last year (and by how many people)?
4. Given the above, are your equivalences logical?
5. What are the likely projections for further harm?
6. Are these products currently age restricted?
7. If so, what proportion of underage consumers are there?
8. What is the proposed penalty for possession? (It seems murderers get home detention nowadays, how hard do they penalize or propose BZP users?)
Also, why do you think it hypocritical to want to allow alcohol based on "harm" statistics when driving is also dangerous. Would you expect such people to also ban driving? There are significant differences between manufactured drugs and alcohol just as their are similarities. I'm not convinced you can apply the hypocrite tag so glibly.
Thats a fair call Zen, and I am glad you are asking this now because none of you guys have bought out any either and are blindly wiling to ban BZP.
ReplyDeleteI am off to bed, so I'll let Mike have a go at answering this or I will tomorrow. I look forward to seeing your rebuttal Zen proving that BZP is so much more dangerous than alcohol.
I ask again: When and where have I suggested a ban on BZP? (wondering why you say: "you guys ... blindly willing to ban BZP").
ReplyDeleteNow, I admit to the occasional authoritarian impulses, but I haven't stated anything about BZP to date.
OK, I think murder is a crime and we should make it illegal but then again, I'm a fan of enshrining the right to self-defence in the law. I suppose I'm now a hypocrite for allowing it some of the time?
Hi Zentiger, sorry if this is rushed, I'm waiting for a taxi to pick me up from home. Flying down to welly this afternoon...
ReplyDelete1. Is BZP related product proven to be safe in any quantity?
There is no such thing as a product "proven to be safe in any quantity" so no. Neither is alcohol, or peanuts, or water for that mattter (yes you can overdose on water, as a woman did last year in Rotorua - hence the Jacqui Dean DHMO story). But there have been over 26 million pills consumed with no deaths attributed to it, and very low levels of adverse events, all of which have been due to overconsumption, or combination with alcohol or illicit substances.
2. What is the volume of alcohol consumed in NZ last year (and by how many people)?
No idea.
3. What was the volume of BZP related product consumed last year (and by how many people)?
Not sure about by year, but I've been given a stat of 26 Million Pills and 400,000 unique users.
4. Given the above, are your equivalences logical?
Well considering BZP is responsible for 0 deaths, and alcohol is directly responsible for 3% of male deaths (thats not including secondary type situations, i.e. drunk driving, wife beating etc) I'd say it is fair to make a comparison.
5. What are the likely projections for further harm?
In terms of BZP none whatsoever. Though, now that it is illegal harms include it being mixed/substituted for meth based drugs, dealing with criminals, jail time, fines, inability to travel to countries due to a criminal conviction etc.
Current harms of BZP include: staying awake (seriously), short term anxiety (also known as a come down, can last up to 8 hours), headaches (just like drinking), nausea etc.. they are hardly what I would call "harms", especially when compared to a criminal conviction "for your own good"!
6. Are these products currently age restricted?
BZP was rescheduled a year or so ago as a Class D restricted substance under the Misuse of Drugs act making it R18. They rushed this through so it only included BZP and not MeOpp, TFmpp and other pirpazines whcih were in party pills, meaning it was perfectly legal to sell a pure MeoPP pill to someone under 18 - yet noone did, as the industry group was self regulating and had its own code of practice.
We all know however that criminal drug dealers don't tend to check ID.
7. If so, what proportion of underage consumers are there?
Any underage consumers would have been consuming BZP illegally anyway. If they were happy to break the law now, do you think that they are going to care after its illegal! Also, those who were underage would likely have been involved in a scene where drug taking was "normal" so in a sense, its better that they be taking BZP than other more harmful drugs (alcohol included).
8. What is the proposed penalty for possession? (It seems murderers get home detention nowadays, how hard do they penalize or propose BZP users?)
Possession: 3 months jail and/or $500 fine
Supply: On indictment: 8 years imprisonment Or Summarily: 1 year jail and/or $1,000 fine. (Currently dairy owners were supplying. Hell when I had ACT on Campuses bag in my possession, I was in supply!).
Allowing your premises or motor vehicle ro be used in the commission of an offence against this Act (i.e. having a party at your house where someone consumes BZP, this part of the Act is an absolute outrage, as you are somehow responsible for the activities of others even when you don't controll them. And the sentance is higher, theoretically this could be applied to parents if their teenagers consumer BZP at home at a party or something):
On indictment: 3 years jail OR Summarily: 6 months jail and/or $500 fine
I'm unsure of penaties for crimes with victims, but I know for instance that the person who assaulted me in the road rage incident last year got given a $700 fine and a slap on the wrist to put it in perspective.
What he said.
ReplyDelete