Discussion in 'Kava News' started by kasa_balavu, Jun 4, 2019.
We made our own submission on behalf of the Aotearoa Kava Research Network. We argued for allowing licensed establishments serving kava and imports by mail.
Why not just argue in favor of lifting the ridiculous import restrictions of a substance that is legal to possess and consume?
Cuz it's not going to happen.
If only cultural bias was that easy to overcome!
You need to understand the real reason for the ban. The government does not want Aboriginal people to have access to kava because the government knows what is best for Aboriginal people. However if kava was banned altogether it would cause a political backlash among Pacific Islanders who live in Australia and it would cost the government votes. So the 'solution' was to permit personal importation of kava up to 2kg, which is a workable inconvenience for members of the islander communities, who frequently travel back and forth, but effectively prevents Aboriginal people from obtaining any kava legally.
That way, the only kava that Aboriginal people can obtain is non-noble, often highly contaminated, through illegal sources. Not surprisingly this 'kava' causes health problems, so the government then says "See, kava is bad for Aboriginal people, we are right to control use and possession". IT is similar to the era of Prohibition in the USA when bathtub gin and other dangerous or deadly concoctions were produced to satisfy the demand for alcohol.
Pleas from Aboriginal people that good quality kava is desperately needed by communities being destroyed by alcohol and the associated family violence, sexual offences and health problems are ignored.
What if yachties were to slip some green cuttings into QLD or the NT under the radar. Usually I firmly support biosecurity and whatnot, though this is one particular cat that could really stand to be let out of the bag.
Thanks for the added context, that's how I've understood the situation the be. That's why all this talk of slightly raising personal import limits seems kind of pointless. Sure it'll benefit the people who can afford and regularly travel back and forth a bit but the people targeted by the oppressive laws are going to be no better off. Tyrants rely on a certain segment of the population to go along with their policies and ideas and by not strongly opposing it altogether there will be very little opportunity to overturn it. IMO it would be more productive for people to bring the motives of the politicians to light and press for full reversal. Otherwise it can be seen as supporting the premise of the ban, which as you point out is to oppress an under represented segment of the population.
This is just another example of why people shouldn't be so quick to support these drug laws, especially when the "drug" as the Australian government clearly views it, is a natural plant that could possibly benefit many people. With the potential to affect the availability in other countries these laws are particularly dangerous since pro ban individuals are very quick to point out that it is banned or restricted in the other country and claim that as justification for a local ban. In the US, we've recently seen that with the so far failed attempt to ban kratom. Even on this forum people will use a ban in SE Asia to justify banning that plant here.
Failed attempt to ban Kratom in the US? Here in Alabama (among other issues) you can catch a felony for possessing any amount of Kratom.
Meanwhile there are still plenty of crooked doctors pushing synthetic opiates on folks who'd probably be better off with a little physical therapy, weed, and kava.
Fortunately for most of us, that's an Alabama issue. If you cross the border into Georgia the situation is much different. There they have chosen to regulate it.. can't be sold to minors, require testing, dosing instructions for safety and effectiveness (realistically the safety issue is very minimal but it gives the people who are scared of potent herbs or that still take the FDA seriously peace of mind) and a few other things. The situation will probably change in Alabama at some point as government funded science advances and exposes the flaws in the "kratom is an opioid" mentality. Other states are beginning to pass regulatory laws to ensure access to safe products. It would be great to see similar action with kava.
Realistically, in it's current state, kava has become a less desirable tool for pain management. Treating sore muscles at the end of the day is much different than treating chronic pain. It can be useful in treating anxiety and depression symptoms that come with pain but MMJ and kratom also do that very effectively while outperforming pharmaceuticals in many cases.
I wonder if saying they want to serve kava to a group of people would be cause for the government to say no...since they don't want people to have it in the first place. I hope it passes. Kava, kratom, and mmj are all legal here in Arizona, but there are some catches. This really is the wild west where anyone can own a gun without training and open or conceal carry it in public. Also the state is overall very conservative and the education system is the worst in the entire country. Where was I going with this? Right, hopefully there's a happy medium out there.
I just heard on the radio that Alabama has passed a law to chemically castrate sex offenders. I mean... it's hard not to agree emotionally with legislation on those kind of heavy topics, but I think they're just playing to the masses.
Like, how about focusing on education, or fair labor standards, or recycling, or, you know... trying to keep the roads paved? It's bread and circus, and the circus can be scary.
Separate names with a comma.