Legalization Strategy

[GOD]

Just an exasmple of what can be done ............... if people wake up and get off their arses .

British Lawyer to Defend Copyright Criminals Free of Charge as a response to what he considers an unfair trial

British lawyer to defend, free of charge, persons involved in copyright infringement cases

Michael Coyle, owner of Lawdit Solicitors, a company that offers legal advice in matters of intellectual property and copyright infringement, has decided to lend a helping hand to those who illegally share copyrighted files. The lawyer announced his intention to fight back at Davenport Lyons, a law firm that was assigned the task of suing and getting legal damages from all the people who are reported to have infringed copyrights in the UK.

Moreover, Coyle is going to hold a brief for everyone interested, because, as he says, he fails to understand why P2P file sharing is considered to infringe copyrights. "If there are persistent infringers then surely the infringers must be ceased. However are the defendants infringing the copyright of the rights holder? According to the laws of copyright, copyright in a work is infringed by a person who without the licence of the copyright owner does, or authorises another to do, any of the acts restricted by the copyright." he said.

The British attorney also offered the example of Isabella Barwinska, in an obvious attempt to strike a cord with his audience, reminding them that a single mother had to pay over £16,000 for sharing Dream Pinball 3D on a P2P network. Moreover, Coyle even expressed his doubts that Barwinska had a fair trial to begin with. "Rather the award was made after Ms Barwinska failed to make an appearance or even enter a defence. This is what the Lawyers may indeed be hoping for. A trial will ensure legal arguments will be heard and one party will not be railroaded."

According to Davenport Lyons, in the near future, at least 7,000 more people will receive letters asking them to pay for what they have illegally used. In case they refuse to pay up, file sharers may experience the fate of the woman who was eventually coerced by law into paying a large amount of money. "My advice if you have received a letter is to fight it. I will defend your case for free." the lawyer assures.

 

[Caduceus Mercurius]

http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/article/opednews7888.htm

 

[GOD]

Yohoo ! People , this "Science & Legality Database" section is maybe something to read and comment on . Please .

 

[Libertine]

What seems to be working here in The States is letting the people decide. Just in the past years elections 2 more states (Michigan and Massachusetts) decriminalized cannabis. As time goes by more and more people know how little danger cannabis represents.

Here is the complete list of states in the US which have decriminalized it either for the whole state or individual communities...

Alaska
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Hawaii
Illinois
Kansas
Maine
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Mississippi
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New York
New Hampshire
North Carolina
Ohio
Oregon
Washington

And the US government is considering legislation to decriminalize possession of less than an ounce by adults. I think we are on the right track...the key is letting the people decide. One factor here in the US the is driving the debate is the high cost of incarcerating people on marijuana offenses. Billions of dollars a year is spent on it and more people are smoking it then ever. Fighting it is a waste of time and money.

 

[GOD]

Its decriminalised in a lot of Europe to . But it didnt come here or there from public preasure and that type of decriminalisation isnt enough . It came from politicians and scientific studys . Its also being either reversed or ignored in some countrys .

We need to educate the people about "drugs" and teach them that they have something to say and that they should say it .

 

[Libertine]

No argument from me on those points GOD. I guess from my point of view is that inherent in any ballot process is a healthy debate...a debate that provides people the opportunity to educate people.

I agree education is the key. The more people know about this issue the better it is for the people trying to reform the laws. I think to get the issue to a position which is more 'front and center' and give everyone a better opportunity to educate is key. Sometimes progress in educating people and reforming bad laws/changing attitudes can be frustratingly slow but the ballot initiatives are key part of the progress being made.

 

[Libertine]

And just one more thought...in these troubled economic times we are going through the costs in money being wasted on the 'War on Drugs' could sway people over to our side. Use the economic downturn to our sides advantage. Fwiw...just an imho.

 

[restin]

this threat/attempt looks very unstructured,is this just a collection of anti-war on drugs homepages/books??

 

[chimp_masta_flex]

The only way to change anything is by actively fighting for it.
We can formulate the best plan in the world and it wont get us any where.
Self-organisation is the key here, protests need to be organised, pamphlets designed, hell-dammit government head-quarters razed to the ground!

Well maybe not the last one... yet.

 

[Forkbender]

this threat/attempt looks very unstructured,is this just a collection of anti-war on drugs homepages/books??

It contains ideas as well, make sure to check out the other big thread in this subforum.

 

[Crimzen]

There needs to be a way for non drug users to be able to support legalization without being looked down upon or seen as someone who takes drugs themselves

some kind of name for people who fit that description maybe

for a super derogatory example, (and i'm sorry for using this but cant think of anything else that fits) something along the lines of nigger-lover, without the negative connotations, obviously

words like stoner or hippy etc. are brands that are easily spread and so if we create one to protect would-be supporters it could help the cause

 

[Forkbender]

"The Sane"?

I don't know if it is within our control to determine this term, though, I guess public debate will in the end be stronger and we can do little about it.

However, I think the most important thing is not how it is called, but what is done. I couldn't care less for the opinion of idiots.

 

[Crimzen]

you may not care for their opinions but some people do, people with things to lose, like say a politician wants to support legalization but doesnt want to be seen as supporting drug abuse (as it would be seen through the eyes of TV and opposing politicians)
people who want to protect themselves from public scrutiny
because currently there ARE people that would support this ...movement, but are too worried about implications and stigma, however bullshit it may be
nobody wants to be looked at differently because of their beliefs and we should do all in our power to support those who would support us

and we do have some control over it, start spreading it, informing people
bumper stickers lol
i actually think its a decent idea, maybe even (this may be getting a little far ahead) when/if this becomes bigger help to start a group specifically for non-drug takers who wold support legalization
maybe thinking TOO far ahead though

 

[GOD]

Part of what i said was about things like that . We should be trying to form bigger groups , groups of people with the same interests but not just directly about drugs . It has to be inclusive and not exclusive . If we have a name that identifys people with just legalising drugs we put a lable on us that can be used negitively against us . If we form unions that are all from diferent directions but want the same things we could call ourselves "Freedom of choice" or something similar . I did talk about this in another thread in this section . Please read that to .

 

[Crimzen]

yeah i've been making an effort to read most of this section tonight but its almost 4am here atm lol

i see what you mean and it makes sense, but wouldnt that broaden the scope and cause less progress to be done in any one area? unless of course membership to said groups is large enough

I'd be ready and willing to do something of this effect in Australia, but i need some kind of direction to go in, i wouldnt know where to start

i know enough people that would support legalization and in fact any kind of societal freedoms, to at least start doing something/beginning to form some kind of group

I'll think on this and get back here within a day or two

 

[GOD]

Good , thanks for spending the time reading the section and for the will to try to do something .

 

[GOD]

In London there is a march with the neutral name "Put people first" to demonstrate about things to do with the G20 meeting . Its 150 groups with diferent causes / agendas and individuals from around the world who put their individual claims to the side and joined together . Then afterwards there is a big meeting where every organisation has a stand where they present facts and literature for their own cause . That means instead of 150 demos where no one went and 150 realy boring public meetings there was one big dermo where thousands came , a big meeting where loads of ideas were presented and it wasnt boring because it was inclusive not exclusive .

I sugested the name "Freedom of choice" . If people could get of their arses they could do the same for that cause . Most of the people who went on the G20 demo would turn up to ours , plus many other organisations . We could create a movement and show the world that we can be taken seriously and that we have legitimate wishes and plans .

 

[restin]

where and when?

 

[im1badpup]

theres been some damn good points raised in this thread, i cant quote them all itd take forever, the demos/rallies pamphlet distribution etc are good for gathering support, unfortunately governments dont really give too much of a shit what people think, except at voting time, even then its false promises with the drug issues, for the most part.
law changes take years to be enacted, unless they go through on an emergency bill (sorry im thinking of uk law i dont know about everywhere else)
what about making a law unenforcable? break the back of the criminal justice system itself, a law that cannot be enforced for all intents and purposes ceases to exist.
a hypothetical example would be perhaps this, mentioned somewhere earlier by god i think, public demonstration(legally) everyone involved been in possesion of cannabis(illegal) once arrests start been made for smoking it, the masses head for the police stations.. carry on smoking, openly show what your doing, how many can they arrest before been overwhelmed by sheer numbers?
with enough people, at some point the police have to stop making arrests, and make crowd dispersal a priority, but wait ... theyre now ignoring the law themselves and letting you smoke, and be in possesion.
those arrested, make sure its peacefully ( we dont want extra, non-related charges ) demand as in your rights a solicitor, (it delays your processing by a few hours and causes paperwork and red tape) refuse the verbal warning, or caution,
(now at this point would anyone be able to tell me if those arrested could argue under the european court of human rights that they was discriminated against and been treated unfairly because theres other people commiting the same offence camped outside the police station who are not been arrested for exactly what you have done?)
those arrested, seek legal advice, delay your release, refuse the caution.
to those not arrested challenge why your not been arrested, and argue why others are unfairly incarcareted.
video is a powerful ally use it.

my point is, if you get away with public possesion and smoking on that day, its a battle won.
raise the stakes if the arrests start and overwhelm them peacefully, in some kind of manner ive described. win the battle of logistics playing numbers.

a hugely speculative figure i know, lets say they did somehow arrest 10000 people ( it aint gonna happen folks) except maybe over a week protest? the court system would be mega mega overloaded, refusal in court to accept fines/conditional discharge etc would mean prison,
never in a million years could they jam 10000 extra people in jail dealt with at the same time.
it would force an emergency session i believe, to change the law,
all it takes is enough people, a bit of balls, a better plan than mine, but the idea is there...

 

[im1badpup]

i had a word with a lawyer .. the example i give was, at a protest where everybody was commiting the self same offence, (ie possesion) for individuals to be singled out and arrested while others was ignored could discrimination and equality laws be brought into use?
they said yes, but it depends on your part of the world according to exactly how the law could be used.
they also said if you succeeded in something like this, there would be radical change in policy, although negatively they could take away the right to demonstate/protest rather than back down and decriminalise drug possesion/use.