One such ‘bust’ has been playing out for a couple of months in Jo’burg. Some old friends of ours (from long before the DC existed) found themselves in the deep end with no less than 21 police on their doorstep one Thursday morning. Alone in the house with two small children and their domestic worker – the young mother seemed to have no option but to let the police in.
They had a warrant, were given entry and proceeded to take over the property for the rest of the day and evening. The team found a couple of ripe Dagga bushes in the back and a jar of heads in the pantry, very quickly. Organised Crime unit and forensics were called in. The police parked off and watched TV, helped themselves to food, downloaded porn on their phones and literally searched every last inch of the premises.
Forensics were done on their daughter’s powder paints, her cupboards were turned upside down and photographed. Twenty one police were involved for a total of thirteen hours. Timed to perfection, the squad of single mother busters checked her in to a police holding cell at 8 minutes past midnight on Friday morning – a classic trick to ensure the vicious dagga growing criminal would sit in jail for four days over the weekend. No magistrate available for bail until Monday morning – sorry.
This lady had resources – for a start, we knew about it very quickly and alerted our legal team. She had grandparents to babysit. She also has a family support network who stayed within earshot of her all weekend. A weekend police holding cell is no place for a petite, scared and frozen young mother. Her husband was in NW Province on business and was unsure whether there was an arrest warrant with his name on it. Turns out there wasn’t. He wasn’t suspected of anything purely because he happened to be away for a couple of days.
The Monday bail application was successful and the struggle to normalise her life began. The smells or sounds don’t just go away, and the thought of 21 cops dismantling your cupboard contents stay fresh for long. A few weeks postponement was given. Enough time to have a rational think about the situation. Of course the two ripe plants in the back garden were weighed wet, with stem, roots and soil – so now the ‘bust’ was huge. Gauteng regional organised crime unit were heading the charge.
Many of you will know what it’s like to wait outside a courtroom for your name to be called. It goes something like this. Plead guilty and you’ll get a fine and a suspended sentence. It all goes away – just like that. Plead not guilty and you head into a lengthy and expensive quagmire of postponements and adjournments. Our heroine in this case had decided to join us on the steps of the High Court and claim her Human Rights. She is not a criminal.
The docket didn’t arrive. All that adrenalin for nothing. A further two weeks were given to the State with a warning from the Magistrate.
The postponements are an ideal opportunity to further empower yourself with knowledge. Back in that police holding cell nobody feels particularly empowered. That’s how the system plays its cards.
After a non appearance a second time by the police and their docket, the case was thrown out of court. A complete non appearance.
At this point it might be good to mention there was a matter of a substantial amount of cash missing from our friend’s home. Foreign exchange. Very tempting. All 21 police were suspected of being complicit in the disappearance of the cash and charges have been laid. We wonder if this might have had something to do with the non appearance of the SAPS in the Magistrates Court?
As a final irony, a week after the case was thrown out of court, the SABC2 TV channel aired its regular Monday ‘In the Line of Duty’ SAPS propaganda show. Featured amongst the program’s overwhelming number of “Dagga Busts” was an insert of the home in question. There was the defendant, there was the herb, there were the stills photos of the R100,000+ lab raid. Lab?
There was no mention of the verdict in court.
The system is a mess. It’s wide open for back-handers and corruption. Make someone scared and irrational, get them to sign to make it all go away and chalk up another statistic for the “War on People”.
It’s all you guys out there that are paying for all of this to take place. How much did a 21 cop 13 hour bust cost the State? Special Unit, forensics, the works. All for a couple of Dagga bushes…..
Is prohibition still working for you?
To say that saying cannabis is better than alcohol is like saying rape is better than murder is to use an absurd circular argument that there must be something wrong with cannabis because otherwise it would be legal. If you banned the holy communion bread for any reason which is not an inconceivable notion given the intolerance to for example the moslem ladies wearing their traditional religious attire in some countries, then overnight your bishop would become an underground practitioner of illegal holy communion, but I doubt that anyone would argue that wearing the moslem scarf is less of a crime or more of a crime than celebrating communion. The fact is that personal Pharmaceutical liberties are attached to the right to life itself and interfereing therein is illegal to the extent that it breaches constitutinally enshrined inalienable human rights. What right has government to dictate what medicine people may or may not use until some self serving group of commercially sponsored individuals decides that such treatment is legitimate. Any law that arrogates to itself the right to dictate personal choices risks killing people by denying them such life saving choices, and is therefore unconstitutional and illegal.
.
Worried About SA asked on what I base my beliefs about the medicinal benefits of Cannabis.
There is a mountain of evidence in this regard on the internet which is there for anyone interested in finding out. I will try to give you an overview of the situation as I see it, but invite you to do your own research to verify this rather than take my word for it.
In summary the USA has had coercive trade policies with the world for decades forcing them to adopt their prohibition policies against cannabis. The history of this policy which can be verified. Is roughly as follows.
After alcohol prohibition ended in USA the then head of the EDA by the name of Anslinger was essentially out of a job, and lobbied powerful commercial and industrial interests like Hearst against whose paper from wood pulp industry Cannabis produced about four times the yield of higher quality paper pulp per acre than you can get from forests and replaces itself in a season compared to 160 years for trees.. Another interest was Du Pont who had just developed and patented synthetic nylon, a by product of his petroleum industry. The cannabis family of plants includes hemp, which is the longest strongest natural fiber in the plant kingdom. In addition, the Decorsicator had just been invented and patented which made it possible to extract the hemp fibers on an industrial scale, and DuPont had good reason to want to stop this competition. America had a more federal system then and the central federal government was largely restricted to revenue. Hence Anslingers famous declaration that ” The treasury has decided to wage a relentless warfare against the despicable dope peddling vulture who preys on the weakness of his fellow man”. The 1939 Cannabis tax act was the only federal law governing cannabis and required a tax stamp to prove one was entitled to have an ounce of cannabis, and of course they never sold any stamps. This law was struck down unanimously by the USA supreme court in 1969 when the feds cynicaly planted cannabis on Dr Timothy Leary on his holiday return from Mexico. Subsequent to this America was without federal cannabis regulation until 1972 when the Schaffer commission produced its report. This was a multi faceted report, but one part of the study Involving the statistician and infant and paediatric specialist Dr Melony Dreher of MIT who was sent off to Jamaica with much cynicism to research the effects of Cannabis smoking pregnant mothers on their babies. Much to her and everyones surprise she found that the children borne to cannabis smoking mothers showed a better performance in a number of key areas being measure.
This was really of no effect because the now published secret meetings, motivations and agendas show that Nixon decided to ignore the Schaffer commision and said “We can just say they are a bunch of pot smoking Doctors.” Nixon thought going after cannabis smokers was a good way to target the anti Vietnam war movement which was well supported from within the pot smoking hippy movement of the time.
In the 1982 Ronald Reagan commissioned a now discredited study which claimed to prove that Cannabis caused brain damage in monkeys. This study has now been exposed as a blatant intentional fraud, and has resulted in well intentioned people in welfare and police and executive clinging tenaciously to this lie., Cannabis is now believed to be one of the most powerful stimulators of new brain cell growth.
The mechanism by which cannainoids assist the immune system and central nervous system by mimmicking the bodies own endo cannabinoids has been extensively researched by medical institutions around the world.
One such recent study which is a source of some amusement to pot smokers like myself was conducted by Dr Donald Tashkin of UCLA in California on 600 patients….. His conclusion was that heavy cannabis smokers had a lower incidence of all cancers than people who smoked nothing at all. This in spite of the fact that Cannabis smoke has a much higher incidence of Toxins and carcinogens than tobacco smoke, once again suggests that something else is happening in the chemistry of cannabis in the body which is countering these carcinogenic effects.
It is interesting to note in this regard, that the body stores cannabis in the fat cells of the body for several months while most other drugs are disposed of by the body within hours or days. I believe this is because the body recognises these cannabinoids as a nutrient..
Another interesting consequence of this fact is that cannabis is entirely non-addictive by any standards. FDA sponsored research studies allocated addictiveness of 9% and 15% to cannabis and alcohol respectively, which I highlight not brcause the FDA has any credibility, but because if it was bad, they would be screaming it from the rooftops given their shameless record of prejudice and duplicity.
The FDA insists Cannabis is a schedule 1 substance with no medicinal value while holding several patents for second rate synthetic THC medicines.
The FDAs own Judge said that cannabis should at least be rescheduled as schedule 2 because of it’s obvious medical benefits, and described the continued prohibition as “Capricious”. Needless to say the FDA just ignored him.
There is a mountain of research to be done which is almost impossible because of this capricius scheduling lie, but what I have most recently learned is that when a woman gets breast cancer, the CB2 receptors start proliferating in the breast tissue along with the mutated cells, so the body is already equiped with a natural mechanism for treating cancer. Cannainoids from the cannabis plant mimmick the behaviour of the bodies own endo-cannainoids, and cause natural cell death targeting the cancer cells selectively….
But please do not take my word for it. You do not need to… The evidence is there on-line for anyone who cares to find out…
I believe that this UV resistant plant whose fatty molecules act as free radical scavengers is responsible for the evolution of homo sapiens sapiens, and has been our symbiotic partner from the dawn of time. As our industrial nuclear age burdens our environment with toxins and carcinogens, our body is no longer capable of producing sufficient endo-cannabinoids to manage, we need this plant more than ever in our diets to ward of unnecessary illness and death.
Hi Aubrey,
Thank you for your detailed response. Unfortunately, youu have not cited any sources to your statements. In either case, I would like to
discuss your response, in limited detail, below:
>> “Cannabis produced about four times the yield of higher quality paper pulp per acre than you can get from forests and replaces itself
in a season compared to 160 years for trees”
I am afraid this is just not true. In Canada, growing hemp for industrial use is not illegal, as far as I know. This site sources some of
the reports from Canada’s exploits, if you look down in the comments section it refers to official reports – http://hemphoax.org/hemp-
myths/hemp-produces-four-times-more-paper-per-acre-per-year-than-trees/ ). From these studies, it appears that there is no economic
argument in growing hemp rather than trees. Hence, I cannot believe the rest of your statement regarding its original ban after the
prohibition of alcohol was lifted.
>> “when the feds cynicaly planted cannabis on Dr Timothy Leary on his holiday return from Mexico”
According to Leary’s OWN biography, his wife forgot she had the marijuana on her and tried to hide it in her own underwear (FLASHBACKS an
autobiography by Timothy Leary Chapter 28 page 236). I am afraid, you are changing the narrative to suit your own views!
>> “Much to her and everyones surprise she found that the children borne to cannabis smoking mothers showed a better performance in a
number of key areas being measure”
Although this is a very interesting result, please have a read of Dr Leary’s actual report here:
http://www.druglibrary.org/SCHAFFER/hemp/medical/can-babies.htm (I just read it, it’s not that long, but it’s quite interesting). The
result of the report is that the higher performance is more likely to be a function of other socio-economic factors, rather than pre-natal
marijuana usage. Although the report does not discount that this COULD be a factor, there is not enough conclusive evidence to make the
statement in the way you made it.
>> “Cannabis is now believed to be one of the most powerful stimulators of new brain cell growth”
According to this article I found (http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn8155-marijuana-might-cause-new-cell-growth-in-the-
brain.html#.Ue2Vpo21HpU), it appears like the synthetic cannabinoid HU210 had more “success” than actual THC. Once again, the research is
inconclusive and proponents of cannabis usage make facts that are not backed up by science.
>> “His conclusion was that heavy cannabis smokers had a lower incidence of all cancers than people who smoked nothing at all.”
According to these two links, Tashkin’s research focussed primarily on lung capcity, but also due to the extensiveness of his research,
correlations about cancer could be made. The study in these two links ONLY reference the incidence of lung and upper airway lung cancer
between those who smoke tabacco only and those who smoke marijuana. Furthermore, the study states that the result is most likely due to
the lower number of times per month that the subjects in the study smoked marijuana than tobacco. Your statement is thus not backed up by
what is available on the study online. All that this study suggests that as far as lung capacity and possibility to develop lung cancer
goes, mild marijuana users are at least no worse off than tobacco smokers. See: http://healthland.time.com/2012/01/10/study-smoking-
marijuana-not-linked-with-lung-damage/ and http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/25/AR2006052501729.html
>> “But please do not take my word for it. You do not need to… The evidence is there on-line for anyone who cares to find out…”
Did you even look at the link to Cancer Research UK that I posted previously? Your statement regarding the breast cancer reduction is not
based on science, but rather belief. No research conclusively backs this up at this point.
>> “is responsible for the evolution of homo sapiens sapiens”
I am glad you preface this with “I believe”, since there is absolutely no evidence in science to back this up.
Due to the points listed above, I have to reject your statement that cannabis has enough PROVEN medical worth to make it a uncontrolled
substance.
Apologies for the badly formatted message. I wrote it in a text editor and then copied-and-pasted to the site, which revealed some line breaks.
I edited your post to make it more readable. You said…
Thank you for your detailed response. Unfortunately, youu have not cited any sources to your statements. In either case, I would like to discuss your response, in limited detail, below:
>> “Cannabis produced about four times the yield of higher quality paper pulp per acre than you can get from forests and replaces itself in a season compared to 160 years for trees”
I am afraid this is just not true. In Canada, growing hemp for industrial use is not illegal, as far as I know. This site sources some of the reports from Canada’s exploits, if you look down in the comments section it refers to official reports – http://hemphoax.org/hemp-
myths/hemp-produces-four-times-more-paper-per-acre-per-year-than-trees/ ). From these studies, it appears that there is no economic
argument in growing hemp rather than trees. Hence, I cannot believe the rest of your statement regarding its original ban after the prohibition of alcohol was lifted.
>> “when the feds cynicaly planted cannabis on Dr Timothy Leary on his holiday return from Mexico”
According to Leary’s OWN biography, his wife forgot she had the marijuana on her and tried to hide it in her own underwear (FLASHBACKS an autobiography by Timothy Leary Chapter 28 page 236). I am afraid, you are changing the narrative to suit your own views!
>> “Much to her and everyones surprise she found that the children borne to cannabis smoking mothers showed a better performance in a number of key areas being measure”
Although this is a very interesting result, please have a read of Dr Leary’s actual report here:
http://www.druglibrary.org/SCHAFFER/hemp/medical/can-babies.htm (I just read it, it’s not that long, but it’s quite interesting). The result of the report is that the higher performance is more likely to be a function of other socio-economic factors, rather than pre-natal marijuana usage. Although the report does not discount that this COULD be a factor, there is not enough conclusive evidence to make the statement in the way you made it.
>> “Cannabis is now believed to be one of the most powerful stimulators of new brain cell growth”
According to this article I found (http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn8155-marijuana-might-cause-new-cell-growth-in-the-brain.html#.Ue2Vpo21HpU), it appears like the synthetic cannabinoid HU210 had more “success” than actual THC. Once again, the research is inconclusive and proponents of cannabis usage make facts that are not backed up by science.
>> “His conclusion was that heavy cannabis smokers had a lower incidence of all cancers than people who smoked nothing at all.”
According to these two links, Tashkin’s research focussed primarily on lung capcity, but also due to the extensiveness of his research, correlations about cancer could be made. The study in these two links ONLY reference the incidence of lung and upper airway lung cancer between those who smoke tabacco only and those who smoke marijuana. Furthermore, the study states that the result is most likely due to the lower number of times per month that the subjects in the study smoked marijuana than tobacco. Your statement is thus not backed up by what is available on the study online. All that this study suggests that as far as lung capacity and possibility to develop lung cancer goes, mild marijuana users are at least no worse off than tobacco smokers. See: http://healthland.time.com/2012/01/10/study-smoking-marijuana-not-linked-with-lung-damage/ and http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/25/AR2006052501729.html
>> “But please do not take my word for it. You do not need to… The evidence is there on-line for anyone who cares to find out…”
Did you even look at the link to Cancer Research UK that I posted previously? Your statement regarding the breast cancer reduction is not based on science, but rather belief. No research conclusively backs this up at this point.
>> “is responsible for the evolution of homo sapiens sapiens”
I am glad you preface this with “I believe”, since there is absolutely no evidence in science to back this up. Due to the points listed above, I have to reject your statement that cannabis has enough PROVEN medical worth to make it a uncontrolled substance.
You said I did not cite my sources but used my reference to my sources to attempt to refute every one of them in turn.
You refute the claim that Hemp can produce four times as much quality paper pulp as forest.
The USDA reported in 1916 that an acre of hemp produced as much paper as four acres of trees annually , yet 70% of American forest have been destroyed since 1916. The United States Department of Agriculture obviously did not agree with you.
Yes Timothy Leary as any man worth his salt would do, decided to take the rap for his wife at the time and conceded in his biography that it was his wife’s but this does not change anything. A unanimous bench of the US supreme court overturned the Cannabis tax act as unconstitutional.
Although you seem to be getting Dr Dreher and Dr Leary a bit mixed up, I presume this is a cut and paste error of some sort. Yes I am aware that Dr Dreher did make some effort to discount the results of the findings as being explicable by other factors, this is normal for scholars. The fact remains that tobacco and alcohol are by comparison a well documented threat to the development and health of the child.
New brain cell growth. You betray the same prejudice that you accuse the cannabis lobby of having. You do however seem to be delighted that the synthetic form may be better at brain cell growth stimulation than the natural product.
You need to decide which side you are on or are you just covering your arse in case you cannot discredit weed and need to compete? LOL
Your muddled attempt to refute Dr Donald Tashkins study does not warrant a reply. What on earth are you talking about. Dr Tashkins conclusions were clear. He found a lower incidence of cancer in general in patients who were smoking cannabis than in patients who smoked nothing at all. It is you who have now twisted his words to suit your agenda. In fact if one can impute anything comparative about his study, it is that tobacco only smokers show significantly higher likelihood of getting cancer than cannabis only smokers.
My comments on the proliferation of the CB2 receptor you say is based on belief and not verified science. I am glad you are professional enough to add the words “at this point”, thus conceding that at a later point this may no longer be true. It is the nature of a sound hypothesis that unverified consequence can be predicted in advance. It is also interesting how much expense pharmaceutical companies are prepared to incur to compete with mother nature and the endo cannabinoid system. LOL
Your attempt to wrap up your argument is like an attempt to pull a rabbit out of a hat. Here is the rabbit. Here is the hat… Therefore the rabbit came out of the hat… It makes no sense at all…
I am a stoner. I love smoking pot and I love getting high, and if it makes me live longer and more fully and more happily, that is wonderful. If it makes the world a healthier happier place, that is also wonderful.
What is your excuse for propagating your above propaganda?
Do you think prohibition is still working? My problem with this question is that it is implying that it ever worked which is something disputable. Any law which arrogates to itself the right to dictate pharmacological liberty is in conflict with the right to life. Fundamentally this means that people have the right to poison themselves. The state should educate but respect liberty.
You write well Aubrey. We’re big fans of cognitive liberty but we will now add pharmacological liberty to the list. Thank for your continued input and commentary on our various mediums.
You may want to google Graham Hancocks latest book “The war on Consciousness”. I found this concise and pertinent to the drugs issue.
And how about protecting those that can not make informed decisions for themselves?
A very relevant question. The fact is if we love our children, we make choices that are best for them. The great tragedy of the present state of affairs is that we have been denied accurate information on the Cannabis issue by design. This remains a human rights issue, and I have no doubt that the United nations must inherently have a motion drafted to recognize pharmacological rights and freedoms as inherent in the fundamental inalienable human Right to life itself. Cannabis use is therefore already legal in so far as the victimization of users who dissent from the arbitrary lies and misinformation upon which the currrent regime in this regard has been constructed, are subject to the arbitrary denial of their rights. The fact is that people are dying because of this law. Any law which arrogates to itself the right to deny or force anyone as to what and how they put anything in their bodies, risks killing people by denying them lifesaving choices. The American DEA’s own judge ruled that denying people access to this plant is “Capricious”
And if you had any idea of the facts on this issue you would as I do, on a matter of principle and fact and the best love of my kids, say “Let the kids smoke pot far rather than use tobacco and Alcohol, and focus on their studies and do the best they can and be passionate abut life. During the recent Dagga March in Cape Town, my 8 year old and five year old daughters marched in front of us with a banner about miracle medicine not drug, with Three beautiful big blue and white 4X4s abreast behind us defining the end of the march, I was approached by a (reputably) Argus reporter and asked how I felt about exposing the children to whatever it was she thought i was exposing them to and I replied that I believe it is important to expose my children to an example of standing up bravely against arrogance, ignorance, lies, disinformtaion, and as we now know, a significant dose of plain treason, and believe me the victimization of cannabis users is as evil as evil can be. Not the slightest fundamental difference between that and the worst forms of zenophobia and racism.
Well I also have a fragile little plant. There is no prospect of it ever becoming something to smoke, but I may just use it as sprouts. Did you know that if you juice the plant raw, it does not make you high at all and you can get about 60 times the cannabinoids and your immune system goes on a roller coaster ride? That is how it cures cancer.
I could add several stories of my experience with Cannabis and the police and blackmail and extortion abuse of position of authority etc…, but I seriously think this issue is bigger than that. The fact is bad law is bad because of abuse as much as the law itself. The right to life is the issue that applies now that the cat is out of the bag about this quirky nutritious plant especially since its astonishing cancer curing properties have been exposed.
Hi Aubrey
Although the issue of how it is (or is not) policed is a separate issue, I do have one question:
what do you base you assertion on that cannabis (or its various chemical forms) have miraculous cancer-curing properties?
According to Cancer Research UK, the findings have been inconclusive at best (ref: http://scienceblog.cancerresearchuk.org/2012/07/25/cannabis-cannabinoids-and-cancer-the-evidence-so-far/ )
You appear to be a very level headed and open minded person. I recommend having a read through that page.
If choosing to legalize cannabis is still a human rights question, then so be it. But I do not think that “magic cancer cure” should be included in the reasoning.
I read that UK cancer institute article you referred to carefully and it did nothing to dissuade me and everything to reinforce my beliefs. They show a pattern of rationalizing which betrays their close links and no doubt funding from pharma companies. They pretend to neutrality or at least display ambivalence on the issue of decriminalising cannabis while admitting that the state of affairs that gives rise to the inconclusiveness and unavailabilty of adequate research studies is exacerbated and or caused by the fact that it is a crime to have or use cannabis. The big Pharama cmpanies like GM are researching cannabis extensively. May I point out to you that the national cancer institute is reading from the same bible as the pharma compnies whose self serving definition of survival is 5 years, and someone who died on the first day of year six remains forever recorded as a survival statistic while all the records of people whose lives have been saved due to the use of cannabinoid therapy using the cannabis plant are dismissed as anecdotal, even though this argument has been pushed to the limit to defund any serious research into cannabis as a medicine, as if any further frustration was even necessary given the stifling effect that the scheduling of cannabis already has on any prospect of proper research being conducted. I find some of the self serving rationalizing in this article to be disengenious to the point of blatant deceiptfulness. I am not impressed with their pretences to be guided only by the interests of the public and the desire to cure this disease. They discuss the mechanisms of cancer curing in the endo cannabinoid system while hiding their lack of funding for research in this direction behind vague and mysteriosus professionally obscure claims of chosing only the most promising studies to fund.
I don’t buy it. I think you are listening to the voice of the pharmaceutical companies who they as much as admit in the article are only interested in funding research which is patentable and profitable for which they hold out the hope of synthesizing chemicals to imitate the chemicals in cannabis. There is no room in their conception of legitimate medicine for a naturally occuring blend of molecules in a plant curing cancer without clear understanding of exactly the mechanism at work so that someone can get the credit and the profit., and while I concede they are to some extend held hostage by the scientific method, I can assure you that patients who have been relieved of suffering and illness and death have no interest in the scientific method. Anecdotal means something completely different to them. I have a sister dieing of breast cancer gone crazy and she will not consider cannabis as a possible life saver as others have done, no doubt on the advice of her doctor. I have a video of an interview with an oncologist who eventually in spite of a career prescribing conventional treatments for colon cancer, decided when he got colon cancer at a late age to cure himself with Rick Simpsons cannabis oil, and was cancer free after six months of treatment. The self serving definition that prevails in the industry will not count him as a survivor until 5 years in spite of the fact that all traces of cancer have left his body after the treatment, and his experience will be discounted as of no significance because it is anecdotal.
I had same problem. But they made an example of me. I got a 5 year susp. Sentence. Destroyed my stuff stole my things made me sit in my underwear while they searched my house and while all the TV news and papper reporters were going through my things.all 20 of them .next thing in comes the police chief and his enterage plus a whole slew of other people not really related to task at hand.
I see no end to this harrassment.
3 small trees in my cupboard. Dont know how they found out but they did.
223g dried plant matter they said. At an estimated street value of R100000 .
me
.
LOL thats hysterically funny. I rest my case. nothing but abuse. this evil law must be struck down by our constitutional court or at least any enforcement activity which violates inalienable fundamental human rights to life and freedom which harms noone while the law leaves a trail of social abuse and disruption in it’s wake.
Prohibition results in prices rising to the absurdity that Cannabis is today Americas largest cash crop. Prohibition is the drug dealers best friend. It is the foundation of his business. Regulation as in the case of Alcohol and Tobacco restores the power to parents to regulate their childrens access to drugs. At present the dealers decide this.
I can add my experience to this. My daughter was still not 18 years old and was arrested for having a single “stop” of this miracle herb in her pocket. She was denied a phone call to me and spent the night in Elsies River holding cells, while I worried myself sick about her. Eventually her friend let me know where she was when he was released and when I asked the interviewer why she was denied a phone call and that she was still 17 the fine suddenly increased from R200 to R400 accompanied by threats to involve welfare if I insisted on objecting to this blackmail and abuse. I dutifully paid the R400 and carried on with my life of living as harmoniously as possible with this “evil” system.
It’s quiet a simple thought that can be likened to an existing model watch: The Union by Score G Productions. Open your eyes. Open your mind.
It’s not working.
Great article. Prohibition has NEVER worked. As for the police, they are an absolute disgrace. Their original job was to protect the community. Now they simply protect corporations (threatened by dagga), corrupt leaders and criminalise decent people. How insane is this world when a PLANT can land people in jail? DC … you are both my heroes. Every single normal, decent person in South Africa is rooting for you. Keep up the great work.
If a mother of two didn’t want to spend the weekend in jail, she probably shouldn’t have been busy conducting illegal activity. Why should the cops be prosecuted (since they allegedly broke the law) when you advocate that someone else – who by your account definitely broke the law – was the subject of an unfair investigation? Either we follow the whole of the law, or all laws become useless.
The law is larger than any individual. It always has been. If you don’t like it, get it changed. But don’t be surprised if you get in trouble before the law changes.
Fair enough.
The person in question, guilty of “illegal activity”, went through the entire justice process, including being jailed. The Police & the State where given an opportunity to ensure her conviction, twice, however choose to not make an appearance(for whatever reason) – forcing the Magistrate to throw the case out and the women was not convicted.
No one here is surprised by this story and we, if anything, expect we may have run-ins with the Police. Considering there are numerous stories like this and long lists of similar acts by the police – that go well beyond the simple act of enforcing the law and go into the realms of corruption and misconduct.
If there are allegations of theft-of-money(also breaking the law, as you have mentioned) and misconduct by the Police – the person in question has every right to pursue charges against the Police, since they are subject to the same laws as everyone else – and the case would go into the same system that failed to prosecute and convict the person in question. It’s worth mentioning that this would take tremendous courage, if these parties alleged behavior is anything to go by, they will be reluctant to let go of such power.
We are in the process of collectively doing everything we can to change the law – it’s a long, arduous process with many facets in which we realistically have a few years ahead of us before any significant changes are seen. Until that time, as you say, we are subject to the law and have to accept the consequences of the actions we take(no matter how unfair we perceive them to be) – no one is denying that.
If we are willing to under-take the rebellion(choosing to break the law) of cultivating cannabis, then we have the responsibility to educate ourselves around what the Law is we are breaking, what our rights are, how the Police operate & enforce the laws and put measures it in place bring yourself to an even playing field – so that you may know your enemy – how he moves, works and thinks – and to display cunning against those who would subjugate you under these laws.
Still, cultivating cunning and educating yourself in no way provides immunity – and this can be nothing more than philosophy when the SAPS come knocking on your door, armed with semi-automatic rifles – we have to accept this consequence and decided how to handle ourselves in this situation.
Also, you didn’t answer the question – “Is prohibition working for you?”
There is no doubt Dagga Prohibition is illegal and unconstitutional. Future generations will look back on us in awe and disbelief that we should be victimising people for a victimless crime based on misinformation and engineered fraudulent research in service of major interested parties in industry and government.
It is precisely because of the inherent potential for this type of corruption of the legislatures intent that prohibition is bad law and inherently open to abuse. In practice it has a corrupting influence on law enforcement, debilitates and poisons crime prevention and enforcement in Executive and Judiciary, while being counter productive in every significant goal of the legislatures intent.
It is time for inspired professional minds to craft a better more socially beneficial strategy for dealing with the drug problem. Would you believe that four decades ago Richard Nixon was telling the world that drugs were our biggest problem? We now know there has to be an enemy, real or bogus to allow for the unleashing of war and profitable enterprises of the puppet masters. I suspect, Sorry I know… (read the white house transcripts. LOL) Marijuana as they decided to label it at the time was a good enemy at the time to unite the people behind, especially given our hippy generations failure to break out in a cold sweat at the idea of smoking this plant and perhaps more pertinently, oppose the war in Vietnam.
perhaps we’ll follow the law when government follows it. as for cannabis being illegal…. the plant was here long before us,….. it will still be here long after us.
there are more alcohol related crimes than there are cannabis related crimes,….
When I was in court, … the judge said “Dagga is Illegal because it’s addictive/habit forming”
to which I replied “and that is why there is an AA (alcoholics anonymous) in every town.”
Saying or implying that cannabis is better than alcohol, is like saying rape is better than murder.
In my opinion alcohol should be illegal as well as cannabis.
What a silly thing to say. I am worried about Planet Earth which is disconcerting given the state of affairs that has been permitted to prevail. My opinion is that everything must be legal as it was 100 years ago before the planet was taken over by the creature from Jekyl island. The greatest success in dealing with protecting people is and has always been education not prohibition. The international consensus on the drugs issue is that it is a medical and mental health issue and not a criminal or legal issue. The greatest success that has been achieved in dealing with the health issue of tobacco abuse was done by education and regulation, not prohibition, and chemical war on a plant. Can you imagine if China had to napalm the tobacco fields of Carolina and Virginia to eliminate the source of the drug that kills hundreds of thousands of Chinese every year, as America does to the Cannabis crops anywhere in the world they chose?
The judge is misinformed. The only figures I know from the USA is 9% weed and 15% Alcohol, but I think this is as you would expect from the DEA, the harshest possible anti weed findng. The fact is Cannibis has zero physical withdrawal attached because the body recognises the cannabinids as a nutrient and stores it in the fat cells for months.
Our highest law is our constitution. A law that kills people, burdens and emasculates our legal system, promotes and causes crime and corruption even in our police force, is both evil and unconstitutional and a crime itself against the people. Legislators and Authorities cannot hide behind laws while flouting the greater law as the supreme court did in the Garreth Prince trial when they openly admitted they were putting Dagga regulation above the constitution. They said it was not possible to meet the general objectives of dagga prohibition if they made an exception for Gareth Prince. That is not their mandate.
Hell if they tackle serious crime with such enthusiasm – maybe there will be hope for this country..
Agreed. The fact is drug enforcement takes such a disproportionate chunk of our budget, with counter productive effect that it raises serious questions about our intentions in the face of serious violent crime and lawlessness. If Cannabis use is a crime, it is a victimless crime, as it is cannabis law is a crime, and the victim is the accused and his family.