Mardi Gras Launch Project Blue

Local News, By SSHQ, 6th December, 2009

New Mardi Gras, ACON and the NSW Gay and Lesbian Rights Lobby are launching ‘Project Blue’, an initiative to inform, support and educate people on health, safety and their rights when faced with police drug dog operations.

NMG will co-ordinate a community approach to the issue, with three areas identified for particular focus: health and safety; rights information; and monitoring and patron assistance at events. Each of the three organisations will take a leading role in one of these key areas.

To kick things off, there will be a community meeting at 7pm on 8 December 2009 at the Rex Centre, 58A Macleay Street, Kings Cross (entrance near Baroda Street) to discuss ideas, listen to feedback and to seek assistance from interested people to be a part of the project.

NMG will provide initial funding for the project and NMG Board member Josh Keech has been tasked with co-ordinating NMG’s work on the project and liaising with community organisations and volunteers that have stepped forward to assist.

“We understand that the police have a difficult job to do,” said NMG Co-Chair Steph Sands. “However it is clear from the feedback that we have had that many in our community feel police operations at our parties have become heavy-handed and intrusive.”

“Today’s joint statement sets out three very clear priority areas where we can make a difference,” said NMG Board Director Josh Keech. “To be effective though this must be a community campaign and I urge as many people to get involved as possible.”

Your Thoughts

shaynesydney

said on the 11th Dec, 2009

LOLZ, ur thilly. OK, I'll try again for you. What is the point in COMPLAINING that the police searched INNOCENT patrons when, unless they have x-ray vision, prescience or an email from God, they cannot possibly know WHO is carrying drugs until they search them? As they do at any other big party or public event. And please don't start this "..as long as you can convince yourself you have the upper hand in the discussion." bullshit, just because you are incapable of following a simple train of ratiocination...it's childish and boring. And while we're at it, why didn't acon invite the police along to this little meeting so they could answer for themselves? Because they have nothing to answer for.

Barrin

said on the 11th Dec, 2009

We are dealing with a specific situation here and the complaints are in hindsight. The court found no one guilty so the patrons searched can be described as innocent. It's that simple. Why waste police time and resources pursuing innocent people? That's the thrust of the complaint. Take the adjective 'innocent' out of that question and it sounds ridiculous. I can't help you with Acon.

shaynesydney

said on the 11th Dec, 2009

Let me lay it out for ya Barrin. I think it's a pity NMG always gets dragged into these acon stunts, especially as I quite respect Steph Sands, but that's just the way it works. And this whole 'Project Blue' crap is just another one of acon's grandstanding stunts to try and stake a position in this community when they have failed on everything from HIV and drug education to their street violence 'campaign.' They're a dud. That is why there is a submission about to be presented to parliament calling for them to be dissolved, so that valuable resources can actually be used to benefit those who need it. That is not something you will read about on this site, samesame exists primarily to flog the Sound Alliance's products and take money from acon for their naff little ads. Which is why the 'investigative' articles on acon never eventuate and why Timmy Wynette closes every thread discussing HIV prevention or acon. There's no 'complaint' here against the police, it's a load of shit.

Urban

said on the 11th Dec, 2009

Simple: Police have to search people, it’s their job, they do it in all places, all situations, every day and night – this is how they seek out criminals and establish people’s innocence or guilt to a point of reasonably applying - or not applying - charges, that is how law enforcement works, just as innocent people’s houses are searched to establish innocence or guilt to a point of applying or not applying charges, just as innocent people are pulled over on roads and forced to blow into breathalysers, and endure random privacy-prodding sidewalk interrogations without having been arrested or charged with anything. There is no logical or rational reason why the GLBTIs at druggy dance parties ought to be somehow legally immune from the police’s right to search anyone. Dance parties are exactly the sort of place people are likely to be found in possession of illegal substances – ambulance incident statistics tally with this, as do accident and emergency admissions recording where overdose victims have come from – as does the presence of Acon Drug Rovers. I live close to an area of high street crime levels. After my friend’s regular visit one mid-evening, he was stopped and searched, on his way home, by police. I believe he was made to provide ID, and that while the police were on their handsets having the ID validated, my friend was forced to sit on the pavement with his hands on his head, and suffer public indignity and humiliation surrounded by swelling crowds of sneering onlookers. He was innocent of all imaginable crimes they might have wanted to check on him for - being a non-drug user, non-drinker, he was sober and not in possession of any substances, nor any other illegal objects such as weapons or stolen items. He was searched randomly because he was walking on a footpath close to a high suspect area at a certain time after nightfall. He is also a gay man. Do you think he had any right to complain about his treatment as an innocent-proven citizen, because of his sexuality? (The Project Blue core argument sits finely balanced on this idea – when the ‘united organisations’ wanting police soft touches for commercial gay dance party events, are gay rights advocacy groups - and looks very, very wobbly.) Equally wobbly looking was the Safe Place shopfront Acon crushed grass roots efforts to set up as an Acon project some time ago, when the org was bothering police about gay assaults on the strip – which Acon vowed to record and give to police, and which Acon never followed through on. That, like so many other such frivolous whims of this org, fizzled away into oblivion and turned out to have been a waste of precious resources diverted from more important needs. Acon, in turn, wound up with even less credibility with the police force than it had had prior to becoming such a nuisance to the force. Acon is no suitable community representation with the law. NMG, also, has obvious conflict of interest issue resting on its reputation, when it a) markets thousands of tickets for parties renowned for illegal drug use and dealings, and b) then tries to object to the law for showing its presence. When NMG was approached some years ago, in Sydney's meth epidemic, and asked to display crystal meth health related material at parties, it refused on the grounds that it had an agreement with Acon to accept no community health information material from anyone but Acon – an org harshly criticised for counselling and printing that crystal meth was just another party drug. The 2 orgs united then to block unbiased community health education, as meth spiralled out of control and young gay men were lulled into a false sense of security about using that drug. They’re uniting now - as more young gay men are lulled into a false sense of security about HIV - to plead queer immunity from basic law enforcement - which young gay men rely on for protection from, intervention into and legal action following homophobic assaults. Such a uniting gay community representational force of two such orgs with two such agenda (and a contentious history of large money interchange) is the last thing this community needs if GLBTIs ever want to be recognised as equal to any other citizen in the eyes of the law.

Barrin

said on the 11th Dec, 2009

Completely wrong. The courts determine guilt or innocence, not the police. With such a goof in the first sentence I didn't bother with the rest. Rightly or wrongly, Project Blue was prompted by what happened at this year's Sleaze Ball where out of 5000 odd people only 17 were detected in posession of drugs. Given the uprecedented, heavy-handed policing (I know, I was there) that figure is laughable. Furthermore, not one of those people was convicted or penalised. Seems the NSW courts are a lot more pragmatic about personal drug use than the police. The issues are summarised very well here: http://www.samesame.com.au/features/4768/Sniffer-Dogs-Getting-Nosey.htm All that aside, it seems I was close to the mark in my second post. This isn't about guilt or innocence or police searches. Some unsuspecting soul pressed the button marked 'ACON'. At least it wasn't me.

Urban

said on the 11th Dec, 2009

If a police search establishes illegal substance possession of prosecutable class and quantity, they have established enough legal offence to arrest you on charges (regardless of any impending court hearing). You're caught red-handed in a criminal act. In that scenario, your pedantic argument that the police haven't the powers of a court to establish your guilt or innocence won’t deter arrest, or being taken into custody, but may well encourage it. If are arrested by an over-stretched constabulary in a late, heavily crowded, widely drug-affected situation, or if you are merely searched and expected to co-operate, argumentative displays only aggravate matters – especially from those apparently drug-affected or intoxicated - and are, understandably, treated as antagonism and resistance/obstruction to police operations. Such attitude tantrums may well only trigger heavier handedness by police to keep you in order - e.g. to slap you in handcuffs, a paddy wagon or a cell - and add to the negative information a court later hears about you as it decides your fate. Are you somehow arguing that the police should have their powers to arrest and charge criminals revoked? That they should have no authority to stop, test and charge drunken drivers, for example, with on the spot fines and penalties? Or violent criminals endangering you or your loved ones? (What, then, would be the use of a judicial court system, with no police to first arrest and charge with crimes hearable before courts of law?) Would you prefer to live in a lawless, anarchic state? Or just your own little queer Utopic ideal in which gays and lesbians are deemed so precious as to qualify for exemption from the law? Neither is about to happen, Barrin. You have no argument here at all. Acon, NMG and GLRL have no argument all here - in Acon's case, they are wasting precious resources diverted from the needier areas of community health the org is primarily funded for. In the cases of all three orgs 'united', they are stirring up and contributing to negative relations for and on the behalf of the gay community with law enforcement - you will need law enforcement if you are a victim of assault, orbbery or other crimes. If the police witness your assault they intervene, protect your safety, put their own safety at risk and charge as per the law. Illicit drug possession does not stand apart from such basic law enforcement modus operandi, nor do GLBTIs.

shaynesydney

said on the 11th Dec, 2009

Thank you, I've long suspected you guys only read your own posts, no one else's. And as JayTee has observed, unless HIV has been cured and the atrocious rates of HIV seroconversion curbed, then acon's job is quite clear. It's their charter and what they are funded for. If they applied 10% of the resources that they waste in creating headlines, grandstanding and inventing imaginary enemies, to educating and advocating on HIV this community would be a healthier and stronger one. I know you don't care that young gay livelihoods are being destroyed by this redundant anachronism, that behaves as if it is our 'gay government,' because we have seen over and again that aconites will suffer anything to defend them, but please do not insult anyone's intelligence by suggesting that this is anything but another stunt. If there were genuine complaints, the correct channels are the NSW Ombudsman, (phone: (02) 9268-1000 or 1800 451 524 (toll free)) or the NSW Police Local Area Commander in the area or the Police Integrity Commission, (phone: 1800-657-079) or your local member of State Parliament. As I said, the fact that acon didn't even inform the police of this meeting, or invite them so they could speak for themselves, says it all. The previous borough commander said he had no idea what acon was on about and that their chair was 'a wanker.' I agree, it's an embarrassment that anyone should think they speak for community.

shaynesydney

said on the 12th Dec, 2009

According to this submission by acon, last month, "The AVP delivers an annual average of 500 individual occasions of services relation to support and referrals for victims of violence. " http://www.aph.gov.au/House/committee/fchy/youthviolence/subs/sub030.pdf Pity none of those 'occasions' are referred to the police, but still, I'm sure that for an org funded according to the number of 'occasions of service' they provide, its all a lot of money. What a load of shit.

shaynesydney

said on the 13th Dec, 2009

With more than 300 arrests for violent/booze/drug offences last night in Sydney, I wonder if the straightie 'taties have a big cry-baby whinge when they get searched by the police; or spend their community funding on a Project Boghead to tell the cops how to do their jobs. For me, I'm glad they take these arseholes off the streets and out of my face.

Urban

said on the 13th Dec, 2009

Completely wrong. The courts determine guilt or innocence, not the police. With such a goof in the first sentence I didn't bother with the rest. Project Blue was prompted by what happened at this year's Sleaze Ball where out of 5000 odd people only 17 were detected in posession of drugs. Well one would hardly expected police resources to stretch to searching an entire 5,000, Barrin, otherwise obviously more than 17 would have been caught. As it was, of the token 33 people (out of 5,000) police searched, those 17 charged represent a detection rate of roughly 50%. As for heavy-handeness, people were lucky there were no cavity searches conducted, and that Police do not have the power to do so. Whether the courts later show lenience is irrelevant to police authority to search, arrest and charge. If recent generations of young GLBTIs had not become encouraged by campaigns of community orgs which ‘normalise’ illicit drug use, they might have more realistic ideas about drugs, parties and police. Such drug-happy community orgs - basking in taxpayer millons - might instead have stretched their drug-use-instruction 'educational' content to also educating gay youth that, for example, the cost of prevention, treatment, loss of productivity in the workplace, property crime, theft, accidents and law enforcement activities associated with drugs and alcohol in Australia is as much as $18 billion. And that, although only a minority of the community use illicit drugs, the related harms to the person using and to the community is significant. These harms include relationship, family and social difficulties, mental health issues, over-dose related deaths, transmission of HIV and Hepatitis C and other blood borne viruses, and involvement in drug related crime (carrying and circulating drugs at parties are drug-related crimes). As for Project Blue, Acon should just butt out, it's nothing to do with that org. They are using payroll staff and other resources, all financed with HIV prevention in mind, not this sort of thing, while HIV remains under-addressed.

There are 9 more comments

View them all

To post a comment, you need to be a SameSame Member

Log-in now or signup for a new account