eBay

nero_bolt · ‎03-09-2014

FRIGHTENING

Victorian-first sewer tests reveal alarming spread of deadly drug ice

AN unprecedented analysis of waste water has revealed the extraordinary extent of the use of the drug ice in Victoria.

Testing at one Melbourne sewage treatment plant on just one day showed that one hit of methamphetamine had been consumed for every 20 people.

Further damning details about the destructive grip of ice on the state are expected to be revealed in a report of a state parliamentary inquiry today.

And the Herald Sun can reveal that:

VICTORIA Police will get $4.5 million extra so all state highway patrol officers can test drivers for drugs, including ice.

EXPERTS found the highest traces of methamphetamine in sewage in the area taking in Melbourne’s west and CBD.

THE Victorian Government will now roll out waste water drug testing statewide.

A SEPARATE Penington Institute assessment of the impact of methamphetamine, including testing of sewage taken from five Victorian sites and data from more than 40 interviews, found that use of the drug is driving an increase in incidents of domestic violence.

The Penington Institute report, Impacts of Methamphetamine in Victoria, contains harrowing accounts of the trail of destruction ice is reaping.

A woman married to an ice user reported: “My husband smashed up the house, tried to abduct children, threw knives at me, and threatened to kill me with a power saw.”

A social worker said: “One father desperately trying to hold his son back from this world and these people ... he nailed his windows shut, disables the car; so (the son) smashes windows and walks.”

Others talked of everyone from parents to tradesmen and sportspeople using ice.

“We’re hearing it from, say, footy club players … they say it’s everywhere in footy in the social circles,” a Grampians alcohol and drugs worker said.

“It’s the transition from being a behind-closed-doors drug to being out in the open and socially acceptable ... that happened over the last six months, I think ... You can buy it openly at the pub.”

The Penington Institute-commissioned sewage analysis in Victoria was done late last year by the University of South Australia.

Similar analysis has been done in Europe and is done regularly in Adelaide.

Waste water from Melbourne Water’s western treatment plant, covering a population of 1.6 million people, had the highest levels: 51.4 doses of methamphetamine per 1000 people on a Sunday, and 38.8 doses per 1000 on a Wednesday last year.

The Sunday figure equates to about one hit per 20 people.

The report stresses that heavy and binge drug users could have several doses per day. One dose is equivalent to 30mg.

The western treatment plant had an average of 72,000 doses per day over the two days.

The eastern treatment plant had an average of 36,000 doses a day, West Wodonga 530, and Warracknabeal 14.

Black Rock, which covers much of Geelong, had a daily average of 3800 doses.

All the samples were taken on a Sunday and a Wednesday.

Dumping of drugs in a toilet obviously can affect results.

Penington Institute acting chief executive officer Wendy Dodd said the western treatment plant’s results took in the CBD’s nightclub district and areas such as Carlton, Parkville and Docklands.

“Unsurprisingly, use was higher on the weekends than during the week in all areas.”

Ms Dodd said: “Our analysis indicates that while levels of use are higher in metropolitan areas, methamphetamine is certainly present in regional and rural areas.”

The average of methamphetamine doses per 1000 people at Black Rock, Warrack-nabeal and Wodonga were all lower than in Adelaide.

The Penington Institute report concluded that the use, availability and purity of methamphetamine have all been increasing.

The report includesinterviews with ice users, the family of an ice user, and staff from hospital emergency departments and from alcohol and drug, needle and syringe, housing, family violence, and youth services across the state.

Interviewees raised concerns about ice’s increased availability, a “normalisation” of ice use, of Aboriginal communities being particularly hard hit by the drug, and a faster decline into addiction.

“One person who everyone knows really well ... He turned into a skeleton ... it was like off a zombie movie,” one said.

“The issue of family violence in relation to methamphetamine use emerged as a key theme,” the report found.

“Of concern was the increase in both the intensity and the incidence of violence, with workers using terminology such as ‘unprecedented’ and ‘prolific’ levels of methamphetamine use involved in family violence. This is reported to have increased over the last two years.”

Family violence services noted that they were seeing much more severe injuries.

This included women hit as they held babies in their arms, broken jaws, broken arms, serious assaults and knife threats.

One service found that last November, 38 per cent of perpetrators were ice users; in December, it was 44 per cent.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victorianfirst-sewer-tests-reveal-alarming-spread-of-deadly-drug-ic...

beanibubs · ‎03-09-2014

Abhorant.

Another example of the Government prying into the lives of everyday people. Testing of amphetamine in our sewer can yield results that are not relating to "ice". There are many other Amphetamines out there, including those prescribed.

But yet again, the overly policed nation that we live in has given more of our tax dollars to an overblown and out of proportion police force to continually harass motorists and citizens by pulling them over at any given time for the reasons of a "breath test". Any vehicle with intel n the registered user that relates to anything narcotic will now have to face being pulled over and harassed by over zealous officers, bringing this nation into a police and nanny state.

I highly doubt that this technology will prove to make road safety any better, considering that there are no guidelines to how much consumption is safe, and what time frame one is able to get back into a vehicle again.

Alcohol has a safe legal limit. However Drugs like Amphetamine and Cannabis linger within the host body, thus someone who is able to drive unencumbered will have to face convincing a judge that they were more than able to operate the vehicle.

To those who merely want to rebut with "we,, it's illegal", are merely copping out. Alcohol ruins just as many lives as any other intoxicating substance, and yet is considered a part of culture due to its legality. Though I do agree that black market peddling of hard substances may cause problems for certain individuals, punishing the entire populace with over policing and harassment without any clear guidelines to blood amphetamine readings, or any research into ones capability to conduct themselves will merely yield a burdened court system.

Once again, the police have taken on more tax dollars, that most Australians would rather not see go into their greedy hands, yet again.

All the while, we are forced to repair the budget through our "robust" taxation rates keeping Australians struggling, tired and now facing the possibility of more harassment from authority.

I'd also like to paste a quote from the SMH; "Police could use the data to identify a need for search warrants or random drug searches. " Random drug searches? Amazing. Just what the police have always wanted - the power to search with ease at any given whim.

The drug war has cost us more money, time and lives that what is deemed reasonable. Our "waste" is being tested at will without consent. Welcome to the Nanny state that is Australia, where Police can do as they please, under the guise of safety and care. Absolutely no restpect.

Good going, idiots.

nero_bolt · ‎03-09-2014

@hotpocketaustralia wrote:
Abhorant.

But yet again, the overly policed nation that we live in has given more of our tax dollars to an overblown and out of proportion police force to continually harass motorists and citizens by pulling them over at any given time for the reasons of a "breath test". Any vehicle with intel n the registered user that relates to anything narcotic will now have to face being pulled over and harassed by over zealous officers, bringing this nation into a police and nanny state.

I take it you dont like the police and have issues with autority and the police force?

Alcohol has a safe legal limit. However Drugs like Amphetamine and Cannabis linger within the host body, thus someone who is able to drive unencumbered will have to face convincing a judge that they were more than able to operate the vehicle.

Are you worried about getting pulled over on a randon drug test?

Once again, the police have taken on more tax dollars, that most Australians would rather not see go into their greedy hands, yet again.

I would happily give the police many millions more to stop people driving under the influence of DRUGS and killing people and families

I'd also like to paste a quote from the SMH; "Police could use the data to identify a need for search warrants or random drug searches. " Random drug searches? Amazing. Just what the police have always wanted - the power to search with ease at any given whim.

FINE by me if it stops the druggies

So you are happy for people to drive drugged up on ICE and POT and other drugs then?

You are happy that these people may kill an innocent people and families then

You are happy that ICE is one of the leading drugs involved in family violence against women and children and the assaults on the streets etc

beanibubs · ‎03-09-2014

"So you are happy for people to drive drugged up on ICE and POT and other drugs then?

You are happy that these people may kill an innocent people and families then

You are happy that ICE is one of the leading drugs involved in family violence against women and children and the assaults on the streets etc"

1. I never suggested that, actually.

People drive whith Alcohol in their systems but it is ok if the BAC is at a legal level, because this suggest that, after much research, that a person is capable at driving a motor vehicle even if at that BAC level. Cannabis stays in your system for up to 3 months and harder drugs are around 3 days. If someone does drugs the night before, that should not mean that they are incapable today to operate a machine.

Edit: I would also like to add that I am a happy consumer of Cannabis, and partake at will at any given time. Though I would not operate a vehicle whilst intoxicated, I have absolutely no reason to not operate a vehicle many hours after the initial effects of Cannabis have worn off. to the point where I am as straight as I was prior to partaking. Though if you were to test me for a black and white Positive/Negative, you would turn up positive, which bares no signifiance in the question of my ability to make judgements.

2. Well this is all anecdotal. There are many several accidents on the road these days that do not involve Drugs or Alchohol. However there are accidents where the use of Drugs or Alchohol may have impeded their judgement, hence why a legal BAC level is the green light, and no one would be prosecuted if they were under the legal limit. No research has been done for Drugs.

3. Well, see, using terms like "one of the leading" is just silly. If it is "one of the leading", what is the leading, and do the former front runners bare no significance?

The fact is that Alcohol is also, "one of the leading", or what I would rather say is, a contributing factor into anti social behavior. However, this is all irrelevant, because we are talking about the operation of motor vehicles and ever growing police powers into spying on its citizens at the risk of being beaten up for not complying, or being prosecuted for partaking in substances days prior and being punished for it for driving a car that carries a harsher sentence than admiting to using drugs at some point in the past, if there is any law that states prior use warrents arrest. In other words, we're not talking about prohibition.

I believe your three point argument stems from media hype or perhaps some deep seeded psychological attachment to authority, and does not contain a single iota of empirical data or information.

beanibubs · ‎03-09-2014

Oh so sorry I missed your points that you wrote under my paragraphs - and I find them offenseive.

I take it you dont like the police and have issues with autority and the police force?

Are you worried about getting pulled over on a randon drug test?

I would happily give the police many millions more to stop people driving under the influence of DRUGS and killing people and families

FINE by me if it stops the druggies

I have issues with the police, not authorities. I don't like the way they conduct themselves at all, and they are getting ever more power.

I am not worried about getting pulled over by a RDT, I am worried and concerned that I and other citizens will be harassed constantly about Drugs and driving, just like the excuse of randomly pulling someone over with the guise of an RBT.

You keep using the shock tactic of "killing people and families". Don't they already have a massive RBT budget, yet they still catch thousands upon thousands of drunken drivers. tighter laws don't act as a deterant.

So you are willing to give up your freedoms - those fought for by ancestors, to "stop the druggies".

You seem to equate drugs synonomously with violence or civil unrest. Yet the study states a meth hit for 1 in 20 people. That would mean you have met, covort and live amongst many drug users, yet society seems pretty stable.

All you are bringing to the table is beefing up police budgets, along with giving up of our freedoms, for the sake of a little security from something the media is blowing out of proportion.

It's attitudes like these that restrict us as human beings - shame.

nero_bolt · ‎03-09-2014

@hotpocketaustralia wrote:
Oh so sorry I missed your points that you wrote under my paragraphs - and I find them offenseive.

I take it you dont like the police and have issues with autority and the police force?

Are you worried about getting pulled over on a randon drug test?

I would happily give the police many millions more to stop people driving under the influence of DRUGS and killing people and families

FINE by me if it stops the druggies

I have issues with the police,

Thought so

not authorities. I don't like the way they conduct themselves at all, and they are getting ever more power.

So you would be happy if we didnt have a police then?

I am not worried about getting pulled over by a RDT, I am worried and concerned that I and other citizens will be harassed constantly about Drugs and driving,

Why will you be harassed? If you are not drugged up or drink driving whats your issue with keeping our roads safer?

just like the excuse of randomly pulling someone over with the guise of an RBT.

Are you being harrassed by the RBT stops? I for one welcome them if it lowers the road toll and keeps drunks and drug drivers off the road..

More of them I say

You keep using the shock tactic of "killing people and families". Don't they already have a massive RBT budget, yet they still catch thousands upon thousands of drunken drivers.

Drunks drivers kill people, drink drivers kill people these are facts.... Drugged drives do the same..... Yes sober and non drug users also kill people with cars but imagine the lowering of the road toll and our insurances if drinkers and druggies never drove

tighter laws don't act as a deterant.

Yes they do

So you are willing to give up your freedoms - those fought for by ancestors, to "stop the druggies".

I am not giving up any freedoms, if you dont do any thing wrong there is nothing to worry about now is there....

So what is the issue

You seem to equate drugs synonomously with violence or civil unrest. Yet the study states a meth hit for 1 in 20 people. That would mean you have met, covort and live amongst many drug users, yet society seems pretty stable.

All you are bringing to the table is beefing up police budgets, along with giving up of our freedoms, for the sake of a little security from something the media is blowing out of proportion.

What freedoms are we giving up? The freedom to have safer roads, safer streets and a safer life.... If thats the case I am all for giving the police more powers to stop drink and drug drivers and drug users in general

It's attitudes like these that restrict us as human beings - shame.

No it not......

So do you think people should be allowed to drive with drugs in their system?

beanibubs · ‎03-09-2014

"Thought so "

So? The issues I have with them stem from over policing and harassment. Yes I have a bias toward them and those are the reasons why. I don't see how this strengthens your argument and is merely an ad hominem.

So you would be happy if we didnt have a police then?

Why is it I somehow expected this extreme form of logic? Where do I mention that we need to abolish law enforcement? Rhetorical question, no need to answer... What we need is a police force that does not harass or abuse their powers, and giving them more powers for "random searches", just enforces the ideal that we are subject to the whim of the police and their abhorant practices that invade our daily lives and intimidate regular law abiding citizens.

Why will you be harassed? If you are not drugged up or drink driving whats your issue with keeping our roads safer?

Not I only, but many. Being constantly pulled over, forced to comply, intimidated by overbearing presence, just sounds to me like pre WWII. All these extra powers do is give the citizen the guise of wanting to stop a situation, when in fact it opens the doors to having the police and the law invade our privacy.

I also have no issue with keeping our roads safer - in fact I uphold values of good driving, skillful judgement and lead by example. But you are missing the greater point here; this is not about road safety, this is about granting police ever more powers and budget, that takes money out of the Australian peoples hands, to fix a miniscule problem. Drug driving is not a rampant social issue - in fact Drink driving is more of a social issue, and tigher laws have done nothing to deter it to the extent people imagined.

All this does is indave our privacy, increase police presence, intimidate regular people, and all the while, punishing all of Australia by taking their tax dollars to get powers that they originally wanted. Police can't stand the fact that they cannot just randomly search people on the street, so they lobby with media hype to get their powers installed. We're the ones who suffer.

Are you being harrassed by the RBT stops? I for one welcome them if it lowers the road toll and keeps drunks and drug drivers off the road..

Yes, I am actually. The overly confident and smug person in blue shines his light in your eye, then on your passengers, or around your car to perhaps pick up on some sort of crime, while forcing you to blow into the device and scrutinizing your every move. Sounds extreme? Well, it's the norm. Besides, RBT's are not even the issue here - I don't mind RBT. It's the mobile RBT that is the issue. A polic power that grants the police to pull over ANYONE ANYTIME based on what intel they have on their vehicles register about the driver, all for the guise of a random breath test. They only do this to pull people up on other crimes, and that is harassment. I'f im not doing anything Illegal, be on your way, don't try to find something on the off chance you meet your arrest quota.

Drunks drivers kill people, drink drivers kill people these are facts.... Drugged drives do the same..... Yes sober and non drug users also kill people with cars but imagine the lowering of the road toll and our insurances if drinkers and druggies never drove

Well, yes, there are times where these things happen. This is why drunk driving is highly illegal, or rather the correct term, DUI (Driving under influence). But someone who is drunk now, may not be drunk later, so why isn;t the same courtesy given to those who use drugs? The question is, afterall, whether the person is capable of operating a motor vehicle, not whether their personal lives fit the ideal of that particular police officers morale.

Yes they do

Really? Is that why Drunk driving, although at a lower point than several years ago, still runs rampant, and still gets our tax dollars thrown at more police, more technology and more RBT's? Drink driving enforcement carries a large dollar sign, that would not be granted if the situation didn't warrent it.

I am not giving up any freedoms, if you dont do any thing wrong there is nothing to worry about now is there....

So what is the issue

This is the kind of argument you would get from someone who does not leave the house (lol, sorry). "If you;re not doing anything wrong, then there's nothing to worry about". Well fair enough - would you leave your door unlocked for law enforcement to waltz in at any time? Would you remove the blinds from your home and install cameras for a 24 hour operator to monitor? Well, no. But, maybe we should do that, just in case they catch some crime.

See, your argument logically fits in with my above scenario. The fact is, in this day and age, we are entitled to privacy and freedom. By people like yourself wanting to slowly chip away at those freedoms, what you will be left with are citizens constantly monitored, constantly scrutinized and without freedom.

Sounds like North Korea if you ask me... Cold War Russie style...

What freedoms are we giving up? The freedom to have safer roads, safer streets and a safer life.... If thats the case I am all for giving the police more powers to stop drink and drug drivers and drug users in general

We're giving up the right to privacy - the right to not be harassed by law enforcement without a valid reason or probable cause.

Having "safer" roads is not a freedom, nor is having a "safer" life or "safer" streets.

It sounds to me like you have an issue with drugs. I've done several drugs - I have no shame in admitting it, and it was a time when I was young and free. I don;t recall murdering my family, or crashing my car while intoxicated, or causing civil unrest. Why? Well, I am a responsible person, with a good ethic and decent morals. Hence, I am not in jail, nor am an addict and maintain a good life, with good standards and pay my hard earned taxes.

No it not......

Ahuh... Solid argument there buddy.

Maybe next time when the Government wants to do a study on your excrament, or install a camera up your toilet seat to check on your health, you will volunteer for it, and make this world a safer place for all of us. Meanwhile I'd probably move to a country with much more freedom than that - perhaps China, or the DPRK.