Log in

View Full Version : Changes to Australia's "security sensitive hazardous substances" legislation...


Zeitgeist
October 4th, 2006, 01:29 PM
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,20519925-662,00.html
http://theweeklytimes.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4511,20516769%255E942,00.html

I don't know wether or not to laugh or cry, the way things are going.

I mean... Ivermectin? WTF?

We're going to have a situation where thousands of ordinary citizens are breaking the law, and not even realising it, for one thing.

fiknet
October 4th, 2006, 02:26 PM
WHAT!!! :mad:

I don't know whether I am under or overestimating the situation because at the moment it appears to me that any sort of pyro or experimentation will be impossible. Fuck, I forgot I'm being protected from terrorists so it's alright. :rolleyes:

Zeitgeist
October 5th, 2006, 12:09 AM
The list is an absolute joke, though.

I suspect that industrial, commercial and agricultural groups are going to put up a fight.

I mean... Brodifacoum? It would be found in just about every other household!

Osmium Tetroxide? Hasn't anyone figured out that that supposed UK plot was totally implausible?

Chopper
October 5th, 2006, 04:41 AM
LOL!!

I guess it's a good thing they're banning CO - I mean, carbon monoxide - now there's some freaky shit! Imagine if the terrorists got their hands on some of that:rolleyes:

Oh well, it was only announced yesterday. Time to crack open the savings account.....

HNO3, H2SO4, H2O2 - here I come, cash in hand!:D

On that note, I like to consider myself a reasonable human-being that does not wish ill of anybody. However, If I get rubbed the wrong way for long enough then I turn into an absolute Mother Fucker. I wont touch anybody or their belongings, but I will do my absolute utmost to psychologically damage somebody.

Of course we're all different, and have varying levels of patience, understanding, tolerance and basic goodness(or lack therof). But I'm obviously mighty naive to believe that life would be better for everybody all round if we just kept to our own shit and didn't fuck with other people.

Sure, I'd love a slice of Joe Blow's fortune - the lucky fucker just dug up a $100,000 gold nugget in his backyard. But after all it is his backyard. Besides, somewhere there's some poor bastard that would be happy to take what I've got.

If people would just shut-the-fuck-up, sit down and be happy with their lot in life, many of us would have an even better time. Every job I've ever moved on from has been a direct consequence of the attitude of the employer. I'm prepared to do shitty work, even when its not for vast sums of money - but to do that for a greedy arsehole. ForFuckingGetIt

Now then, 50% H2O2 tomorrow, followed by 70% HNO3 on monday. At the very least there'd have to be some kind of buy-back scheme. Failing that, "Hmm, must have used that all already. Bother!"

shady mutha
October 5th, 2006, 07:40 PM
Just imagine what the chemical situation will be like 10 or even 20 years from now.

Chris The Great
October 5th, 2006, 09:20 PM
If people would just shut-the-fuck-up, sit down and be happy with their lot in life, many of us would have an even better time.

But that would totally blow the notion of vast overcunsumption right out of the water. Corporations can't have stuff like that, so they've become quite good at creating manufactured wants the sheeple see as needs. But this is somewhat off topic.

fiknet
December 20th, 2006, 10:12 AM
I thought I'd bump this thread and give an update since I have obtained a copy of the discussion paper. The discussion will continue until March 1st next year and after that it still will be some time before they draft the new laws and implement them.

The archive is pass worded with "roguesci" as the paper explicitly mentions not to upload or distribute it, I don't know why since all I had to do is email a request with a fake name and organization.

http://rapidshare.com/files/8265378/DiscussionPaper-Final.pae.html

EDIT:
It appears that someone was having problems with the type of encryption; here it is in a normal archive.

http://rapidshare.com/files/8321288/DiscussionPaper-Final.zip.html

Bugger
December 20th, 2006, 05:42 PM
Osmium (VIII) tetroxide (OsO4) is used, in small quantities, as a stain for animal tissues in biological laboratories, to make the tissues easier to see in thin sections between glass pieces in a microscope. It is obtained directly from Os metal (which would also have to be prohibited or restricted) by heating it in air, its formation being easily detectable by its penetrating odor, but its vapor is very toxic by contact or inhalation.

As for Brodifacium, a brominated coumarin derivative similar to warfarin, this is a common poison used in rat poison pellets (and in New Zealand, sometimes in pellets for killing the introduced Australian brushtail opossum, our no. 1 pest, as a substitute for 1080 (sodium monofluoroacetate)), available from supermarkets and farm supplies stores.

CO is, of course, generated in large quantities every day, by incomplete combustion of organic matter especially fuels in car and other engines (along with CO2, and traces of CH2O, CH3OH, HCOOH, NO, N2O, and partly oxygenated long-chain hydrocarbons). It is fairly easily made in the laboratory, as for research purposes e.g. to make transition-metal carbonyls, e.g. as the anhydride of formic acid, HCOOH, and used in large quantities in the extraction and purification of Ni which forms a volatile carbonyl, Ni(CO)4.

As for H2SO4, this is reasonably easy to make by means of a crude home-made lead-chamber process, starting with sulfur, available from pharmacies and farm supplies stores. HNO3, however, may be more difficult to make clandestinely, if all nitrates were also to be restricted.

H2O2 can be obtained as a bleach from supermarkets, at a strength of about 3%; and provided it is free from impurities which could cause decomposition, there are ways to concentrate it, as well as to synthesize it on a small scale.

irish
December 23rd, 2006, 07:06 AM
It's in a very sad state this country of ours, WHY most of these chemicals are on this list would be interesting to know.
It will be interesting to see how difficult and exactly what is involved with getting the license and permits, I use a few of the Chemicals on that list for my (legitimate and legal) work so I suppose I'm going to find out regardless of wanting to or not.

I'll bet it's expensive when it happens, one day they will find out the hard way that you can't keep draining money out of farmers, wonder where they think food will come from when most on the land now have left the land, gone bankrupt, suicided etc.

tweak
February 2nd, 2007, 10:42 PM
I would be much happier if our Pollie's weren't using UK and US framework as prime examples. I found this disturbing passage about UK policy.

Amendments have been made to the (UK) Bill to include provisions to control ‘dangerous substances’. The Secretary of State has powers, by order, to modify the list of substances. A section of the Bill allows for the addition of toxic chemicals, animal and plant pathogens and pests to the list. The Bill also gives powers to the Secretary of State to request information about the security of dangerous substances. It mandates that parties notify the Secretary of State before keeping or using any dangerous substances, and imposes duties for compliance with security directions.

Irish: You are right, this country is in a very sad state. We will be a carbon copy of America in no time at all. Obesity rates included! :D

knowledgehungry
February 3rd, 2007, 01:46 AM
Tweak you are retarded if you are insinuating that America is worse of than Aus. I will not argue that America is getting worse everyday, but we are still allowed to own handguns, purchase pepper spray anywhere we want, and we don't have a banned chemicals list near what you have.

Not only that if this website was hosted by an Australian man I guarantee your government would come for a visit. This website is hosted by Mega who openly states his name, school, and I am sure pays the fee for this website via check or Credit Card, the government knows who he is but since we, the United States have the First Amendment the government does nothing.

As to us being fat, it makes sense that the most prosperous country in the world might overindulge a little bit in the spoils of victory.

I'm sorry NBK for going off topic, but I do not like someone from another country bashing ours!

Chopper
February 3rd, 2007, 10:19 AM
Now, now children. Be nice.

We could argue the merits of one country over another for many fruitless years to come. This would of course, be pretty pointless - not to mention petty in the extreme.

So I'll just agree with Knowledgehungry - Australia is every bit as fucked as the United States is.

This whole thing reminds me of something Eddie Murphy said years ago - The problem today, is that everybody's looking for the perfect partner. It's bullshit! There's no such thing as the perfect person. What you've gotta do is go out and find somebody that's just as fucked up as you are.

While our problematic issues may differ, you're certainly no better off than we are my friend.

However the real issue at hand here is what steps can we take to circumvent these ridiculous new changes in policy. For fuck's sake, a car doing 100 kmh or 60 odd mph has a far greater capacity to do damage than 1 gun or 1 stick of dynamite.

The chemicals are not the problem - the problem is the sneaky fuckers in our midst that have chosen to use the freedoms we provide against us. If these useless kewl raghead fucks can still get stuff, then so can we. Just use your heads people and quit the whinning.

Hell, look at people living in some of the eastern bloc countries, look at people living in war-time circumstances. It's all about innovative approaches. As long as you've got a brain, you can do practically anything with virtually nothing.

The only constant thing is change, you can't buy dynamite in corner stores anymore, you can't make and fly model rockets where ever you please anymore. But both are stil available, with or without a licence.

So take your pick - vote for people that will rid us of any immigration and the 1 or 2 bad seeds that come through here-and-there, OR work your way around the new rules. If you're really that passionate about chemistry, it's not a barrier - just an added frustration.

tweak
February 3rd, 2007, 05:32 PM
Tweak you are retarded if you are insinuating that America is worse of than Aus. I will not argue that America is getting worse everyday, but we are still allowed to own handguns, purchase pepper spray anywhere we want, and we don't have a banned chemicals list near what you have.

First and foremost, I never directly compared the two countries.
I also agree that America is getting worse everyday, so is Australia.
May I also add that handguns and pepper spray are readily available over here. We just have tougher licencing requirements than you.
Finally, to the best of my knowledge, the only 'banned' chemicals list that I know of in Australia, relates to illicit drugs. You are mistaken.

If you want to know why our gun laws are like they are:
http://www.nexusmagazine.com/articles/MartinBryant1.html

Eoin
February 3rd, 2007, 10:07 PM
As I've been reminded I've been a lurker for the past few months.
Sorry, been in India for the last 2.5 months and had few opportunities to get to computers that weren't treadle opperated.

Ref the newest Aust laws on chemicals, and you all can quote me on this.

There is no stupidity to which Australian Governments will not aspire if there is a perceived vote in it.

"We are doing something"

knowledgehungry
February 4th, 2007, 12:26 AM
My apologies for overreacting. I just thought that you were making a backhand comment against the U.S., which would have been very impolite considering that the U.S. of A. is what brings you this forum(more or less).

As far as "banned" chemicals, I was referring to the restricted chemicals this thread was talking about. I am sorry for not using precise language.

Basically what I meant to say is that if Australia was a carbon copy of the United States, you guys would be a little better off, in terms of civil liberties at least. That's just my opinion, and an openly biased one at that.

Back on topic, has this been put into effect yet, and has it impacted any of you guys personally?

tweak
February 6th, 2007, 05:11 PM
KnowledgeHungry, I understand your position and I respect it.
The legislation is not finalised yet, we have to wait until March to find out what the verdict is. AN legislation has been in effect for over a year now, but I am yet to see it impact my region. Considering the number of chemicals about to be reviewed, if anything does happens then *most* people won't notice an impact for up to 4-5 years.
I feel this issue is a double edged sword. On one hand I would like for the controls to be passed, to prevent fools from aquiring energetic precursors.
On the other hand, I want to be able to avoid having to purify OTC combinations to get what I want. That is the future though..:(

Alexires
February 7th, 2007, 06:45 AM
tweak - I follow the idea of Darwinism in this. Give the fools, idiots and niggers enough rope and they will hang themselves.

Let them booze, take drugs, have unprotected sex to their hearts content. If they want to smoke 50 packs a day, then let them. But let them die also.

I'd rather that some idiot got hold of some precursors and blew himself up (thus removing himself from the gene pool) than have him protected by the sheltering hands of the government, because (remember) everyone is equal, even those with substandard intellects. :mad:

It's the fact that in removing those freedoms, they disarm the populace. In a perfect democracy, the people would have no need to revolt against the government, as they themselves would be governing the state. In a liberal representative democracy, the people should have the right to remove the government (by force) if necessary and replace it with a new government.

By removing our means to do this, they cause us to rely on the systems and backups that have been in place since this countries inception and are now no longer adequite to defend democracy and liberty. The only difference between Australian government and a Dictatorship is that a dictatorship is one person, and has a greater capacity for good than democracy ever will have.

I say this because the benign dictator is more in contact with the people, where as the democratic leaders tend to have their information filtered to them or made up completely to follow their own goals.

Remember, those that would trade a little freedom for a little security will find they have neither.