NationStates Jolt Archive

Greetings to the Fellow Member Nations, I, President Trollax Kinora of the Republic of Temara am here before you to argue for the Drug Trade Regulation Act.
An Act of Legislation that is designed to enforce a standard of conduct on the sale and administration of any drug used for recreational purposes. This Act is not a push to legalisenor ban drugs and their trade throught the united nations it is however a move to ensure that the drugs trafficked, both legally and illegally, throught the member states of the united nations be of some acceptable standard. Should they fail to be so, whether sold legally or illegaly, there will be international charges applicable as both secondary and in addition to any local criminal charges.
The Republic of Temara requests your support in aiding this proposal to become a resolution, a resolution to help make the world (whether we exist with drugs or without,) a safer place.
The proposal (at present, resides here (http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/98240/page=UN_proposal/start=80)

Greetings to the Fellow Member Nations, I, President Trollax Kinora of the Republic of Temara am here before you to argue for the Drug Trade Regulation Act.

This could be interesting...

An Act of Legislation that is designed to enforce a standard of conduct on the sale and administration of any drug used for recreational purposes. This Act is not a push to legalisenor ban drugs and their trade throught the united nations it is however a move to ensure that the drugs trafficked, both legally and illegally, throught the member states of the united nations be of some acceptable standard. Should they fail to be so, whether sold legally or illegaly, there will be international charges applicable as both secondary and in addition to any local criminal charges.

I get the feeling this has a chance for being very, very bad...

The Republic of Temara requests your support in aiding this proposal to become a resolution, a resolution to help make the world (whether we exist with drugs or without,) a safer place.
The proposal (at present, resides here (http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/98240/page=UN_proposal/start=80)

Try posting it here next time. You're lucky I'm in a forgiving mood.

In such nations where the use of recreational substances are legal; member governments agree to adopt the following guidelines
1.1
Adherence to a international standard of product management and testing with the intent to minimise physical harm and loss of life. Also, that the standard of product management shall be held as equal to that of any international pharamceutical authority

No standard exists.

1.2
That adequate training be required for any employee within the industry. Such training shall cover the servicing and administration of substances, training in recognition of persons who are are already under the influence, checking of identification, screening for minors... etc.

Training people to make drugs?

1.2.1
That the service of any substance covered under this act to any person already under the influence of any substance covered herein shall be a criminal offence punishable under local laws

So they can't buy drugs if they're high? Doesn't quite sound right...

1.3
That the provision of any such substances covered under this act to minors be prohibited

Hmm. Not bad.

1.3.1
That where no such standard exists the minimum age for provision of substances to persons be no lower than 16

Hmm. Could be very bad. Also, potentially ignores species differences.

2
Any organisation or individual operating outside the authority of a member nation's government, (or in a nation where trade in any substance listed below is illegal,) in the production and servicing of substances listed under this act shall be liable to international prossecution (as secondary, and in addition, to any local charges) should they fail to meet any requirements of articles 1.1 through 1.3.1

And those working for the government or even the government itself?

3
Organisations shall be prohibited from promoting any substances herein without giving due recognition to the potentially harmful effects of overuse

Not bad.

3.1
Vendors and suppliers shall be required to prominently display signs at every point of sale, warning of the effects of overuse of substances listed herein. Such signage must be no smaller than 210×297 mm with a minimum font size of 8 mm

Kinda small for the seriousness of it.

3.1.1
Vendors and suppliers shall be required to offer information about counselling and support services for substance abusers upon request, signage relating to such support services shall also be displayed in every area where substances are serviced. Signage shall be shall be no smaller than 210×297 mm with a minimum font size of 8 mm

See above.

3.1.2
Pamphlets relating to support services also be made available in any area where substances are serviced, such pamplets shall be freely accessible to all patrons and be offered in the national language with pamphlets in minority languages available on request

Sounds good.

Article 3.2
Vendors and suppliers shall be required to display signs containing a brief description of these guidelines, in common language, at the entrance to any establishment where substances are serviced. Such signage shall be no smaller than 297×420 mm with a minimum font size of 12 mm

Not bad.

4
That provisions be made available for addicted persons to self-exclude themselves from a substance serving premises, where an agreement shall be signed by both the sufferer and management whereby:
They may be removed from the establishment should they try to enter
Staff of the establishment (and the establishment itself) may be fined should they serve this person
They may be not permitted to use any substances covered, on the premises

Not bad.

5
The definition of a substance covered under this act shall be understood to be the following:
Any substance that shall have the capacity to alter mood or perception as a side-effect to any existent or nonexistent medicinal benefit be it known or unknown

Which is just about everything.

The definition of a substance covered under this act shall be understood to be the following:
Any substance that shall have the capacity to alter mood or perception as a side-effect to any existent or nonexistent medicinal benefit be it known or unknown

Hmmm... When I eat mozzerella cheese, it makes me happy. Does this mean that the Italian restaurant down the street is now subject to these laws? Grape juice has antioxidants, that's an existent medical benefit, so now the grape farmers of Nargopia are to be under constant scrutiny?

In such nations where the use of recreational substances are legal; member governments agree to adopt the following guidelines
1.1
Adherence to a international standard of product management and testing with the intent to minimise physical harm and loss of life. Also, that the standard of product management shall be held as equal to that of any international pharamceutical authority
No standard exists.

Well I'll be off to write another proposal...

1.2
That adequate training be required for any employee within the industry. Such training shall cover the servicing and administration of substances, training in recognition of persons who are are already under the influence, checking of identification, screening for minors... etc.
Training people to make drugs?

No, training people on proper procedures for selling drugs. Say for example in a marijuana-selling establishment where somebody asks for one joint and is given the equivalent of six by an attendant who is not concentrating.

1.2.1
That the service of any substance covered under this act to any person already under the influence of any substance covered herein shall be a criminal offence punishable under local laws
So they can't buy drugs if they're high? Doesn't quite sound right...
Sure, if someone has already ome under the influence of one substance then mixing them is inherently dangerous. Also if someone is already high on, say, pot, and wants more and more, endangering their health, and since there is no accurate visual guage for the level of "highness" a person is experiencing once those symptoms present themselves in any fashjion service to such a person or through any third party (such as a friend) be refused.

1.3.1
That where no such standard exists the minimum age for provision of substances to persons be no lower than 16

Hmm. Could be very bad. Also, potentially ignores species differences.
I'm sure that there can be delegates for any additional species to take into account the appropriate age.

2
Any organisation or individual operating outside the authority of a member nation's government, (or in a nation where trade in any substance listed below is illegal,) in the production and servicing of substances listed under this act shall be liable to international prossecution (as secondary, and in addition, to any local charges) should they fail to meet any requirements of articles 1.1 through 1.3.1
And those working for the government or even the government itself?
This is a dual act, to both cover criminal organisations selling drugs in countries where drugs are illegal. Or any organisation selling drugs without the authority or permission of the nation's legal system.
For example: A cartell of Military officers operating outside the law in the manufacture of drugs oin a nation where such drugs are illegal. Or an organisation operating without license in a nation where drugs are legal.
It also covers and sanctions the enforcement of standards through a watchdog service.

3.1
Vendors and suppliers shall be required to prominently display signs at every point of sale, warning of the effects of overuse of substances listed herein. Such signage must be no smaller than 210×297 mm with a minimum font size of 8 mm
Kinda small for the seriousness of it.
Space requirements. The poropsal submission form has a maximum character length.

3.1.1
Vendors and suppliers shall be required to offer information about counselling and support services for substance abusers upon request, signage relating to such support services shall also be displayed in every area where substances are serviced. Signage shall be shall be no smaller than 210×297 mm with a minimum font size of 8 mm
See above.
See above.

5
The definition of a substance covered under this act shall be understood to be the following:
Any substance that shall have the capacity to alter mood or perception as a side-effect to any existent or nonexistent medicinal benefit be it known or unknown
Which is just about everything.

While just about everything can alter mood or perception they cannot do so by directly interfacing with the brain through chemical transfer via the blood brain barrier. This definition was selected, instead of a list, due to the space requirements of the submission form. You Can have a drink of orange juice and feel good, but it's not because the orange juice contains THC, and if it did it would be therefore regulated due to the THC content.
Chocolate also fails to fall under this act because while it causes a reaction in brain chemistry it does not do so by the transferral of foreign chemicals in through the blood brain barrier.
An interesting sade affect would be that caffeine would be regulated under this act, but then standards of regulation would be left to the law of common sense. LSD can be dangerous if inappropriately administered, so can caffeine but the difference between the two levels of danger we're talking about is quite large.

Well I'll be off to write another proposal...[/quoter]

Good luck.

[quote]No, training people on proper procedures for selling drugs. Say for example in a marijuana-selling establishment where somebody asks for one joint and is given the equivalent of six by an attendant who is not concentrating.

Ah. Thanks for the clarification.

Sure, if someone has already ome under the influence of one substance then mixing them is inherently dangerous. Also if someone is already high on, say, pot, and wants more and more, endangering their health, and since there is no accurate visual guage for the level of "highness" a person is experiencing once those symptoms present themselves in any fashjion service to such a person or through any third party (such as a friend) be refused.

Which doesn't stop people from mixing legal drugs in their own homes in dangerous combinations, which is very well known for happening (never mix alcohol and industrial-strength pain killers).

I'm sure that there can be delegates for any additional species to take into account the appropriate age.

Just want pointing out a problem with a set age.

This is a dual act, to both cover criminal organisations selling drugs in countries where drugs are illegal. Or any organisation selling drugs without the authority or permission of the nation's legal system.
For example: A cartell of Military officers operating outside the law in the manufacture of drugs oin a nation where such drugs are illegal. Or an organisation operating without license in a nation where drugs are legal.
It also covers and sanctions the enforcement of standards through a watchdog service.

Which is another useless committee.

Still doesn't quite cover the question of if a government is the one selling illegally in another nation.

Space requirements. The poropsal submission form has a maximum character length.


See above.

I meant the font size requirement.

While just about everything can alter mood or perception they cannot do so by directly interfacing with the brain through chemical transfer via the blood brain barrier. This definition was selected, instead of a list, due to the space requirements of the submission form. You Can have a drink of orange juice and feel good, but it's not because the orange juice contains THC, and if it did it would be therefore regulated due to the THC content.

So certain placebos are still good. After all, the power of the mind to convince the body is nothing...

Most chemicals people take in do interact with their brain in some way or another, including that from orange juice.

Chocolate also fails to fall under this act because while it causes a reaction in brain chemistry it does not do so by the transferral of foreign chemicals in through the blood brain barrier.
An interesting sade affect would be that caffeine would be regulated under this act, but then standards of regulation would be left to the law of common sense. LSD can be dangerous if inappropriately administered, so can caffeine but the difference between the two levels of danger we're talking about is quite large.

Caffeine is also more addictive, but far less dangerous, than LSD and an addict becomes dependent upon caffeine for normal brain function.

Telling governments to regulate recreational drugs is the equivalent of attempting to control your heart rate.

To completely implement program of such broad size and scope would require the government to hire hundreds or even thousands of inspectors and agents. I refuse to expand the mission of the police in my country beyond that of solving serious crimes... not trying to stop Joe Schmoe from getting his kicks by putting a substance into his body. Now if he were to force drugs upon someone else, that's an entirely different issue. The only time any of our citizens take issue with those who choose to use drugs is when they hurt others.

Another invalid argument would be to ask private corporations to monitor the drug trade, or ask vendors to regulate it themselves. That would require a certain degree of over-sight that my government will not delegate to citizens.

In summary, my government will not... will NOT endorse monitoring the drug trade in our nation. That is exactly why we have very few laws regulating the use of drugs.

Telling governments to regulate recreational drugs is the equivalent of attempting to control your heart rate.

To completely implement program of such broad size and scope would require the government to hire hundreds or even thousands of inspectors and agents. I refuse to expand the mission of the police in my country beyond that of solving serious crimes... not trying to stop Joe Schmoe from getting his kicks by putting a substance into his body. Now if he were to force drugs upon someone else, that's an entirely different issue. The only time any of our citizens take issue with those who choose to use drugs is when they hurt others.

Another invalid argument would be to ask private corporations to monitor the drug trade, or ask vendors to regulate it themselves. That would require a certain degree of over-sight that my government will not delegate to citizens.

In summary, my government will not... will NOT endorse monitoring the drug trade in our nation. That is exactly why we have very few laws regulating the use of drugs.

And if you were to purchase a recreational drug in your country and it was imporperly made? Plenty of people die in Temara every year because of party drugs that have been cut with backyard pesticides and solvents. This is not about barcoding people on their forehead before they will be permitted to be sold drugs, this is about ensuring that those people who do so will be able to do so in the future, and not have to worry that their brains will have holes burned into them because someone decided that it would be OK to put mothballs in your ecstasy.

So certain placebos are still good. After all, the power of the mind to convince the body is nothing...

Most chemicals people take in do interact with their brain in some way or another, including that from orange juice.

Caffeine is also more addictive, but far less dangerous, than LSD and an addict becomes dependent upon caffeine for normal brain function.

Caffeine may indeed incite dependence much sooner than most other drugs, so does caffeine, but what's the difference between a heavy caffeine drinker and a heavy LSD user? Flashbacks, higher propensity towards mental illness, and for some a permanent alteration of their brainchemistry.

As far as orange juice goes. The alcohol in my vodka and orange juice reaches my brain about 10 times faster than any enzymes or proteins I may metabolize form the orange juice. Any chemical present in oranges I may absorb though the ingestion of orange juice has it's effects dwarfed by those of which I would experience from any narcotic substance. We're talking about significant effects here, not some emotional placebo effect someone feels from eating their favourite flavour of icecream.

To avoid the messy definition things, leave that up to individual nations. Different nations, for cultural reasons or otherwise, have different ideas. Kelssek classifies alcohol differently from marijuana and cocaine and has more relaxed laws on it because we have a long established beer-drinking culture.

Overall, it seems quite good, similar to Kelssek's IC drug laws. And it doesn't push legalisation, so DRUGS=EVIL countries shouldn't have any problems with this.


1.3
That the provision of any such substances covered under this act to minors be prohibited

Hmm. Not bad.


Quote:
1.3.1
That where no such standard exists the minimum age for provision of substances to persons be no lower than 16

Hmm. Could be very bad. Also, potentially ignores species differences.


Er, actually it means "it's 16 unless the individual country has a better idea".

EDIT: On second thought, section 1.3.1 is completely redundant since I'm sure every country has a definition of an age of majority. Thus, remove it.

Sorry, missed the part about not pushing for legalization of drug trade. Fix it up a little and I'll support.

Does this mean that paint huffing will become regulated.. I can misuse anything given the circumstances.. number 5 would need to be retooled. Now, how do I get this gold paint off..

I would support this resolution if it provided training only to pharmaceutical companies that make a certain percentage of medicine (say, 35%). Also, I think your definition of "recreational drug" is too vague.

I support this proposal. It needs a few minor adjustments, and doesn't cover everything, but it would help the problem it is trying to address significantly. The problem with most proposals is they either don't change anything or try and solve a big problem all at once, usually through micromanagement.

I also support this proposal, but i to also think that there is Some Minor Adjustments But Other Than That We are Behind this proposal.

I support this proposal. It needs a few minor adjustments, and doesn't cover everything, but it would help the problem it is trying to address significantly. The problem with most proposals is they either don't change anything or try and solve a big problem all at once, usually through micromanagement.

Technically, this is micromanagement as well, but a necessary and well-intentioned form of it.

In such nations where the use of recreational substances are legal; member governments agree to adopt the following guidelines
1.1
Adherence to a international standard of product management and testing with the intent to minimise physical harm and loss of life. Also, that the standard of product management shall be held as equal to that of any international pharamceutical authority

No standard exists.


Well I'll be off to write another proposal...

Has there been a resolution against quote pyramids yet?

...because this thread is just screaming for one!

I support this proposal. It needs a few minor adjustments, and doesn't cover everything, but it would help the problem it is trying to address significantly. The problem with most proposals is they either don't change anything or try and solve a big problem all at once, usually through micromanagement.

Well if you'd like to propose changes it will be quite easy to let this proposal die the first time around. Please feel free to telegram Temara and we will respond. Other nations in the UNA have so far provided no assistance with this proposal despite repeated requests.