All posts by Richard

Dogs, Jihad on Drugs™, Peter Dunne

Die Like a Beagle

1 Comment

smoking_beagles

Ask the experimenters why they experiment on animals, and the answer is:
“Because the animals are like us.”

Ask the experimenters why it is morally OK to experiment on animals, and the answer is:
“Because the animals are not like us.”

Animal experimentation rests on a logical contradiction.

— Charles R. Magel

Party pills testing will mean dogs have to die. That was the headline when what is now the Psychoactive Substances Act made its first splash in the Parliamentary pan. Thanks to public protest and some hard work by the Greens and a few like-minded Labour MPs there are now tight restrictions on the use of animal testing in the legislation. I think the Act now states that where there are alternatives to animal tests, those alternatives must be used. But what if there are no alternatives?

The Act establishes a Psychoactive Substances Regulatory Authority within the Ministry of Health. But the Psychoactive Substances Regulations aren’t in place yet. We know that manufacturers will be required to provide “sufficient pre-clinical and clinical information to satisfy an independent expert advisory committee that the product poses no more than a low risk of harm.” But we don’t know what that information is yet. And the devil is in the details.

The bottom line is that there is still no clause in the Act that guarantees that suppliers of psychoactive substances will NOT be required to test those substances on animals. There’s been a lot of sound and fury in Parliament, signifying nothing. The Psychoactive Substances Act is still a turd. Let’s flush it.

Please join me in protest on Tuesday 30 July. That’s when Parliament’s back. In Wellington there is a march organised by HUHA. The strategy is to come out strong and show our Parliamentarians that we’re not happy the moment they return.

MARCH TO PARLIAMENT – SAY NO TO ANIMAL TESTING ON PARTY PILLS

977824_10151778971187755_1348595114_o

All Blacks, Christian Libertarianism, Corruption, Guns, JFK, Jihad on Drugs™, Justice, Libertarianz, Morbid Angel, Nazi Thugs

NZ Police: Brutalising the Old

13 Comments

urgent_northland_meeting_over_alleged_police_brutality

(I’m not sure how to embed videos from TVNZ. But click anywhere on the above image to visit the ONE News website and the video will play automatically.)

Last time I posted about the NZ Police they were brutalising the sick. Now (it is alleged) they’re brutalising the old. A 64 year old woman was put in a headlock and her arms forced behind her back when she tried to pick up the phone. Her own phone, in her own home. She sustained severe bruising to her arms and face.

“We’re terrified of the police,” said one woman at a community meeting in the Paparoa Town Hall. And with good reason, it seems.

Once upon a time, police officers were among the most respected members of the community. That’s no longer so. Today, many otherwise law abiding people as well as actual criminals see them as “the filth”. Indisputably, there is corruption in the NZ Police. Who knows how much? I like to think that police corruption in New Zealand consists of “isolated pockets”. But I worry that police corruption is endemic. Regardless, the loss of respect for the police is something the police have brought upon themselves.

The War on Drugs™ plays a huge role in this. The incident reported in the video above is all over a few cannabis plants! Prohibition is unjust and those who enforce our drug laws commit injustices in doing so.

I’m optimistic that New Zealand will legalise cannabis soon. One day the War on Drugs™ will effectively be over. But when it’s all over, will the reputation of the NZ Police recover? The NZ Police support cannabis prohibition. Cannabis prohibition makes arresting people easy. Whether they’re being investigated for a real crime, or not. And they get to go for helicopter rides at the taxpayers’s expense. Will the police become better people when they have to put in real work to establish grounds to arrest and convict people for committing real crimes? Will the police attract a different class of recruit when the job perks no longer include free drugs and free helicopter rides? I’m pessimistic.

Heads up, peeps. I’m starting to have doubts about libertarianism itself. 😎

A few years ago, the Libertarianz Party merchandised some apparel with the slogan, “There’s No Government Like No Government.” And underneath, in smaller letters, “Unless it’s Very, Very Small.” The idea being that the proper role of government is limited to running a police force, a judiciary and an army. But should the government be involved even in these? I’m finding it hard to ignore the mounting evidence that our police force is corrupt and/or incompetent. And I already know that our justice system is severely compromised. Violent criminals get treated like victims, and lying murdering psychopaths walk free, thanks to show trials manipulated by a cynical MSM and obsessional narcissistic former All Blacks.

And, while I’ve yet to hear a bad word about the men and women of the New Zealand Defence Force (and I hope I don’t), I’m starting to wonder—should I abandon the label “Christian libertarian” in favour of “anarcho-monarchist”?

ALCP, Green Party, NORML, Peter Dunne, Prohibition, Psychoactive Substances Act, Slayer, Winston Churchill

Haggling about the price

1 Comment

800x800_media-14138-37212

There is a famous anecdote about a conversation Winston Churchill once had with a woman at a party.

Churchill: Madam, would you sleep with me for five million pounds?
Socialite: My goodness, Mr. Churchill … Well, I suppose … we would have to discuss terms, of course …
Churchill: Would you sleep with me for five pounds?
Socialite: Mr. Churchill, what kind of woman do you think I am?!
Churchill: Madam, we’ve already established that. Now we are haggling about the price.

The moral of the story is obvious. If you sleep with someone for money—any amount of money—then you are a prostitute. Even if that someone is Winston Churchill.

Even though it was Winston Churchill, it was rather a cruel trick he played. But not as cruel as testing recreational drugs on animals. And that brings me to the point of this post.

The government has played a cruel trick on those in the drug law reform movement who give the thumbs up to the Psychoactive Substances Bill.

Government minister: Activist, would you accept significant drug law reform if it meant some limited amount of animal testing?
DLR activist: My goodness, Mr. Dunne … Well, I suppose … we would have to make submissions to the Select Committee, of course …
Government minister: Would you accept significant drug law reform if it meant that thousands of the nation’s beloved family pets are made to suffer slow, agonising deaths?
DLR activist: Mr. Dunne, what kind of drug law reform activist do you think I am?!
Government minister: Activist, we’ve already established that. Now we are haggling about the depth of your depravity.

Five pounds or five million pounds? If you accept animal testing—any amount of animal testing—as the price of drug law reform, then you are a sadist. Even if the drugs are really, really good.

Now, I’m not suggesting that any of my friends in the drug law reform movement are sadists. But I am suggesting that they’ve been cruelly tricked. And I am suggesting that they think carefully about how far down this particular slippery slope they’re prepared to slide. And I’m suggesting that after they’ve thought about it they claw their way back up to the moral high ground.