Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Avani Terraces - Greenway
Life is looking up

Beware the young tobacco spies

By johnboy - 17 October 2006 50

Katy Gallagher has proudly announced that her new tobacco control laws have passed the Assembly, her media release carries the curious headline: “NEW LEGISLATIVE PASSED TO PREVENT TOBACCO SALES TO MINORS”

The heart of the matter seems to be this:

“It involves trained young volunteers under the supervision of an authorised officer attempting to purchase cigarettes or other smoking products from retail outlets”

It might beat flipping burgers for the right kid I guess.

What’s Your opinion?


Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
50 Responses to
Beware the young tobacco spies
nyssa76 9:48 pm 17 Oct 06

Pandy I lived in the States and was asked for ID to buy smokes (I was 21yo). Never asked for ID for alcohol when I went out.

I do report the people but I still think that those under 18yo shouldn’t be selling them at all. Is Ms. Gallagher going to send “spies” in to monitor that too?

vg 9:30 pm 17 Oct 06

Which is what I said, but you argue well Obi-Wan

Binker 9:16 pm 17 Oct 06

Culpable in the moral sense maybe, but if the legislation has made it legal for a child of 15 (or whatever it is) to but cigarettes at the behest of an “authorized officer” (and the legislation obviously will make it legal for the authorized officer to request this) then neither the child or the authorized officer has any legal culpability (as they are not doing anything illegal). Hence, getting back to this being a way around the Bunning v Cross discretion. An alternative way around the Bunning v Cross discretion is the issue of certificates by the AG as has become the practice since Ridgeway in major investigations.

vg 9:09 pm 17 Oct 06

Using that argument then the ‘kid’ that buys the ciggies is just as culpable

Binker 8:25 pm 17 Oct 06

Mason CJ Dean and Dawson JJ “The question whether the common law of this country recognizes a substantive defence of “entrapment” to a charge of a criminal offence has not been directly addressed in any case in this Court. It has, however, been considered on a number of occasions by State Supreme Courts which have consistently and emphatically answered it in the negative. Similarly, the courts of England, Canada and New Zealand have denied the existence of such a substantive common law defence. The decisions to that effect are not surprising since it is a central thesis of our criminal law that a person who voluntarily and with the necessary intent commits all the objective elements of a criminal offence is guilty of that offence regardless of whether he or she was induced to act by another, whether private citizen or law enforcement officer.” Ridgeway v The Queen.

Pandy 8:10 pm 17 Oct 06

Nyssa,

Once I saw the pimple faced kid behind the counter sell some smokes to a girl in school uniform without asking for id. (Ever been to the states? Expect even 30 yo to be asked for id before getting into a bar). I reported it and the authorities were very quick to phone me and ask for details. They then proceeded to stake-out the store for a day before going into the store and talking to the manager. I am sure that I have not seen a recourrance of this incident.

It pays to report these people so they can be better educated.

vg 7:41 pm 17 Oct 06

Bollocks. Have a read of the laws in relation to conspiracy. You can’t simply conspire with an ‘agent’ of the government. You need a 3rd person to make a conspiracy.

Ridgeay talks about controlled operations. i.e. by the AFP ‘allowing’ a controlled delivery it technically imported the drugs themselves, committing the same offence as Ridgeway. They now get certificates to obviate that

Binker 7:27 pm 17 Oct 06

There is no doctrine of “entrapment” in Australia and certainly no leg enshrining it. Courts have the discretion to exclude evidence that is illegally obtained. The courts balance competing public policy objectives “On the one hand there is the public need to bring to conviction those who commit criminal offences. On the other hand is the public interest in the protection of the individual from unlawful and unfair treatment.” Bunning v Cross (it’s the discretion used by the Crt Crim App in Vic in R v Thomas). But anyway by legislating presumably (not having read the bill/leg) it makes it legal for the kids to by smokes under the supervision of the authorized officer however the selling of the smokes remains illegal. Thus the Bunning v Cross discretion does not even come into play.

It’s a practice that is akin to any controlled operation, see John Anthony Ridgeway v The Queen for the HC more recent discussion of the area (which is also authority for the absence of a doctrine of entrapment in Aust).

nyssa76 7:20 pm 17 Oct 06

Pandy, the kids are selling the smokes to their friends.

The number of times I’ve had to speak to the manager of a shop regarding this is a joke.

I’ve seen “older looking” 14yo’s get smokes of their 16yo friends. I had students who would brag about buying the smokes from their local shops because a friend would sell the smokes to them.

Pandy 7:14 pm 17 Oct 06

So you have to be 18 to sell smokes and chewbacca? First I heard of it.

johnboy 5:02 pm 17 Oct 06

Apparently the human rights act doesn’t make us safe from entrapment.

Absent Diane 4:52 pm 17 Oct 06

haven’t they been doing that in the rest of australia for years?

vg 4:47 pm 17 Oct 06

Silly Katy might want to check out a little legislative thing called entrapment.

Or having the ‘authorised officer’ charged with aiding and abetting the offence.

Surely someone’s civil rights will be breached. What a bunch of wankers

nyssa76 4:22 pm 17 Oct 06

I went to buy smokes and alcohol last week and I had a student try to sell me both at her place of employment (IGA in South Canberra).

I informed her that she couldn’t as she was only 15yo. I made her boss (a man over 45yo) sell them to me.

She’s a good kid but how many students working in small shops adhere to the rules?

No one under 18yo shoud be behind the counter where you can buy cigarettes or alcohol, even if they are cheaper labour.

bonfire 4:16 pm 17 Oct 06

outrageous.

i expect this of socialists though.

next step ? the red guard ?

1 2 3 4

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site