Exactly my point, I knew there was something fishy about that pole. Thanks for posting this Frank, I had been looking for this.
Bill C-15 has passed in Canada. You will get 6 Months prison for one plant. ORGANIZE.
- Thread starter StrainCollector
- Start date
mr noodles
Member
do we missed something here ? at least its a very interesting article .
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/courageous-court-obtuse-government/article1433602/
t was an act of judicial courage, not arrogance, for the British Columbia Court of Appeal to set limits Friday on how the Canadian government can fight against illegal drug use. Canada went too far in holding the threat of criminal prosecution over those who work at or use Insite, the clinic in Vancouver's Downtown Eastside. It tried to fight a so-called drug war on the backs of the most addicted population in Canada. In doing so, it put their lives at risk. Governments should not be able to bully and threaten the lives of the most vulnerable people.
Judges have a moral duty, under the Canadian Constitution, to stand up to such bullying. One of the men in whose name the constitutional challenge was brought has been a heroin addict for 38 years. On average, the users have been injecting drugs for 15 years. They aren't doing it for recreation. They're ill. Even Ottawa acknowledges that much. The argument that permitting them to do it under medical supervision might encourage drug use is preposterous; Canada's best-known medical clinic for addicts is a veritable marketing campaign for the horrors of drug use.
Eighty per cent of Insite users have been incarcerated. Eighty-seven per cent have been infected with Hepatitis C, and 17 per cent have HIV. Nearly 60 per cent have had an overdose. Thirty-eight per cent sell their bodies. Yet Ottawa would criminalize the health-care service that could save and has saved lives. Of course it's a matter that bears on constitutional rights.
Ottawa's arguments were obtuse in the extreme. Exempting these addicts from the criminal law, it said in its written brief to the appeal court, is like "requiring an exception from the law of theft for kleptomaniacs," or "an exception from the impaired driving laws for alcoholics." Huh? The addicts are finding a safe place, under medical supervision, to inject drugs. The Vancouver police refer addicts to it. Do the police ask kleptomaniacs to steal something? Do they give alcoholics their car keys? The B.C. Attorney General supports Insite. This is about an actual health facility, not an ivory-tower exercise in abstract argument.
There is a parallel with medical marijuana. Courts have ruled that it would be unreasonable and unfair to lay criminal charges against those who use the illegal drug to alleviate the pain of cancer. It would be wrong under the Constitution to criminalize very ill people who make the choice to seek this relief from pain.
The war on drugs came to Canada, and it picked on a bunch of desperately ill addicts. Some war. Boldly, B.C.'s highest court, and before that a trial judge, have let Ottawa know that any war on drugs fought in this country should not endanger the right of addicts to get life-saving health care.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the interesting part is this quote from ^^^^^^
quote : There is a parallel with medical marijuana. Courts have ruled that it would be unreasonable and unfair to lay criminal charges against those who use the illegal drug to alleviate the pain of cancer. It would be wrong under the Constitution to criminalize very ill people who make the choice to seek this relief from pain.
do the judgment is applicable to mmj ?
correct me but the other applicable judgment can be used as a defence if you got a proof of illness that can qualify under the mmar program even if you dont have a mmar card because no doctor venture to sign or very few do ? or it make reference to the actual unworking mmar program in canada ?
here another part of an article about the bc injection site case : http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5jYWERtViRSDznO5TiUDC_qkVWWKg
'' The earlier B.C. Supreme Court decision struck down parts of Canada's drug laws, finding that the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act was not in line with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The lower court ruling found that Insite is a health care facility, and therefore provincial jurisdiction, not federal, and gave Insite immediate constitutional exemption to stay open without a federal exemption from drug laws. ''
^^^ wonder if this cannot be used in mmj case ? '' the controlled substance act was not in line with the charter of rights ??????
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/courageous-court-obtuse-government/article1433602/
t was an act of judicial courage, not arrogance, for the British Columbia Court of Appeal to set limits Friday on how the Canadian government can fight against illegal drug use. Canada went too far in holding the threat of criminal prosecution over those who work at or use Insite, the clinic in Vancouver's Downtown Eastside. It tried to fight a so-called drug war on the backs of the most addicted population in Canada. In doing so, it put their lives at risk. Governments should not be able to bully and threaten the lives of the most vulnerable people.
Judges have a moral duty, under the Canadian Constitution, to stand up to such bullying. One of the men in whose name the constitutional challenge was brought has been a heroin addict for 38 years. On average, the users have been injecting drugs for 15 years. They aren't doing it for recreation. They're ill. Even Ottawa acknowledges that much. The argument that permitting them to do it under medical supervision might encourage drug use is preposterous; Canada's best-known medical clinic for addicts is a veritable marketing campaign for the horrors of drug use.
Eighty per cent of Insite users have been incarcerated. Eighty-seven per cent have been infected with Hepatitis C, and 17 per cent have HIV. Nearly 60 per cent have had an overdose. Thirty-eight per cent sell their bodies. Yet Ottawa would criminalize the health-care service that could save and has saved lives. Of course it's a matter that bears on constitutional rights.
Ottawa's arguments were obtuse in the extreme. Exempting these addicts from the criminal law, it said in its written brief to the appeal court, is like "requiring an exception from the law of theft for kleptomaniacs," or "an exception from the impaired driving laws for alcoholics." Huh? The addicts are finding a safe place, under medical supervision, to inject drugs. The Vancouver police refer addicts to it. Do the police ask kleptomaniacs to steal something? Do they give alcoholics their car keys? The B.C. Attorney General supports Insite. This is about an actual health facility, not an ivory-tower exercise in abstract argument.
There is a parallel with medical marijuana. Courts have ruled that it would be unreasonable and unfair to lay criminal charges against those who use the illegal drug to alleviate the pain of cancer. It would be wrong under the Constitution to criminalize very ill people who make the choice to seek this relief from pain.
The war on drugs came to Canada, and it picked on a bunch of desperately ill addicts. Some war. Boldly, B.C.'s highest court, and before that a trial judge, have let Ottawa know that any war on drugs fought in this country should not endanger the right of addicts to get life-saving health care.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the interesting part is this quote from ^^^^^^
quote : There is a parallel with medical marijuana. Courts have ruled that it would be unreasonable and unfair to lay criminal charges against those who use the illegal drug to alleviate the pain of cancer. It would be wrong under the Constitution to criminalize very ill people who make the choice to seek this relief from pain.
do the judgment is applicable to mmj ?
correct me but the other applicable judgment can be used as a defence if you got a proof of illness that can qualify under the mmar program even if you dont have a mmar card because no doctor venture to sign or very few do ? or it make reference to the actual unworking mmar program in canada ?
here another part of an article about the bc injection site case : http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5jYWERtViRSDznO5TiUDC_qkVWWKg
'' The earlier B.C. Supreme Court decision struck down parts of Canada's drug laws, finding that the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act was not in line with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The lower court ruling found that Insite is a health care facility, and therefore provincial jurisdiction, not federal, and gave Insite immediate constitutional exemption to stay open without a federal exemption from drug laws. ''
^^^ wonder if this cannot be used in mmj case ? '' the controlled substance act was not in line with the charter of rights ??????
I'm sure things are going to get pretty ugly in the next few months. I heard there was a cabinet shuffle, you can shuffle the deck Steve, but they're all the same boring no good cards in the deck.
I see Rob has dodged the bullet, perfect, he has pissed off quite a few senators. I wasn't aware he was the MP from Niagara Falls.
I see Rob has dodged the bullet, perfect, he has pissed off quite a few senators. I wasn't aware he was the MP from Niagara Falls.
mr noodles
Member
MAJOR BREAKING NEWS !
Mr. Ignatieff was asked about Ross Rebagliati’s nomination to run for the Grits in the B.C. interior. In response, he opined that other people’s habits were none of his business; that “possession of small amounts of marijuana” shouldn’t be a criminal matter — which it is, of course; that “nobody should suffer consequences for personal recreational uses of marijuana”; and that if someone was to ask him if he wanted to legalize it, he’d “say no.”
Mr. Ignatieff was asked about Ross Rebagliati’s nomination to run for the Grits in the B.C. interior. In response, he opined that other people’s habits were none of his business; that “possession of small amounts of marijuana” shouldn’t be a criminal matter — which it is, of course; that “nobody should suffer consequences for personal recreational uses of marijuana”; and that if someone was to ask him if he wanted to legalize it, he’d “say no.”
[Not exactly breaking news. This exchange happened a week ago at a Student meeting at Uof T's campus in Mississauga.]
Iggy is screwed either way on this question. And this time, supporters of marijuana legalization have made it harder on the Liberals and the cause - not easier.
45% of Canadians do not support legalization. Almost all of the Conservative party's supporters fall within that 45% of voters. (two thirds of that 45% are CPC supporters)
Problem is, about HALF of the people who will vote for the Liberals ALSO fall within that 45% (the other third). And the fear is that if the Liberals support legalization, those voters will defect to the Conservatives and then it's game over.
Damned is he does; damned if he doesn't. What would tip the scales in the pro MJ side's favor is if there was less of a divided left in Canada and the pro MJ voters would more than make up for defectors to the conservatives.
But that does not happen and the Left has made it harder, not easier, to actually accomplish meaningful change.
The problem is the Greens. We have hardcore activists who line up behind the Green Party, which however well intended, cannot win. That support bleeds nearly a tenth of the electorate off of both the the Liberals and NDP - the parties which can win. Worse, the split in the vote awards seats to the Conservatives (who otherwise would not win as many a half a dozen to ten of those closely contested seats -- because of the Green Party's splitting of the vote). Worse, this diverts ardent supporters of Marijuana legalization out of the Liberal party -- the party that needs them the most -- in order to change their overall policy at a cabinet level.
It's still the politics of protest applied to a situation in which marijuana legalization supporters form a majority viewpoint in the country. But trying to get these people to wake the fuck up and realize they can shape and BE the mainstream is nigh impossible.
Yeah, I know it's fashionable to support the Green Party. It's also stupid - and one of the primary reasons there have been successive Conservative minority governments in Canada.
My point: don't blame Iggy for the quandary he's been put in. He has a party that supports legalization and an electorate that has been split over the issue. Because of the Greens, he's having to fight for the vote to put him into first place to be drawn from the centre right, instead of the centre-left.
The Green Party's ideals are not the problem; the Green Party idealism is. The supporters of the Greens need to grow up and get its idealists into the NDP and the Liberal Party where they can make a real difference, instead of handing the government over to the Conservative Party of Canada each election.
mr noodles
Member
lol it went under the radar due to the horrible haitian tragedy .
well he might not support the total legalization but if he is on the decriminalization , its a serious first step and most importantly it will help to have a decent mmj program that work and really accessible .
only fixing the mmar program will be a 200 % improvement .
its clear lets unite and vote liberals .ndp will never make even the opposition , the green means nothings and the bloc is anti pot at 100 %, i once talked with abloc mp and they are full of shit .
no matter how and what i will vote liberals because its the only solution to a severe crisis .
well he might not support the total legalization but if he is on the decriminalization , its a serious first step and most importantly it will help to have a decent mmj program that work and really accessible .
only fixing the mmar program will be a 200 % improvement .
its clear lets unite and vote liberals .ndp will never make even the opposition , the green means nothings and the bloc is anti pot at 100 %, i once talked with abloc mp and they are full of shit .
no matter how and what i will vote liberals because its the only solution to a severe crisis .
Bot the NDP and the Bloc are supportive of legalization.
If there is a Liberal minority government, at the same time as there is a vote to legalize in California, the issue will come on to the radar of the Canadian media as a real political issue. The national polling that will follow will ALL confirm support for the plan, which by then should be in the high 50s, nationally. The means of reducing costs and raising provincial revenue will be real at a time when provincial transfers will, once agian, be savaged in a Federal budget. The overwhelming nuber of provinces will WANT that revenue (and reduced law enforcement costs) to soften the blow and will be supportive.
The Tories will squawk - but there is a real chance for change under those electoral and fiscal conditions. Once the matter has been ceded to provincial jurisdiction, it can't be easily unceded as the matter will fall constitutionally within property and civil rights. In short, once legalization is done - it effectively can't be UNdone without a political fight that the Federal government then cannot win against the Provinces. A done deal.
So it's truly not that hard to accomplish, provided the right government is installed at precisely the right time and place.
If the government of the day is a Liberal minority gov at the same time that Cali votes yes, this is entirely doable as early as 2011. Yes, that close. Truly.
If there is a Liberal minority government, at the same time as there is a vote to legalize in California, the issue will come on to the radar of the Canadian media as a real political issue. The national polling that will follow will ALL confirm support for the plan, which by then should be in the high 50s, nationally. The means of reducing costs and raising provincial revenue will be real at a time when provincial transfers will, once agian, be savaged in a Federal budget. The overwhelming nuber of provinces will WANT that revenue (and reduced law enforcement costs) to soften the blow and will be supportive.
The Tories will squawk - but there is a real chance for change under those electoral and fiscal conditions. Once the matter has been ceded to provincial jurisdiction, it can't be easily unceded as the matter will fall constitutionally within property and civil rights. In short, once legalization is done - it effectively can't be UNdone without a political fight that the Federal government then cannot win against the Provinces. A done deal.
So it's truly not that hard to accomplish, provided the right government is installed at precisely the right time and place.
If the government of the day is a Liberal minority gov at the same time that Cali votes yes, this is entirely doable as early as 2011. Yes, that close. Truly.
CareFreeLivin
Member
It seems things are finally falling into place for marijuana legalization. Many states are considering (and some passing) medical marijuana legislation, and this has given rise to a legitimate discussion on legalization. We all need to keep pushing, but Fatigues is right, we need to focus our efforts and not waste time pandering to these counterproductive fringe groups.
mr noodles
Member
liberals party seems to push the end of prohibition !
liberals party seems to push the end of prohibition !
http://www.ctvolympics.ca/torch/news/newsid=28005.html
Despite the imposition of a code of silence on Mr. Rebagliati by the federal Liberal Party, for whom he plans to run in the next election, the former Olympian spoke openly about his desire to see marijuana legalized.
"Prohibition didn't work; this isn't working," he said after running with the torch, which some have even said resembles a giant joint.
"You look at the numbers; it's not helping by throwing people in jail. I think the thing we can focus on is helping people with addictions, taking a proactive view.
------------------------------------------------------------------
after ignatieff position on decriminalization we can safely say we have a leverage power with the liberals even if they are not my favourite....the ndp stand zero chance to be in power, too bad i like jack a lot but he CANT DO NOTHING TO HELP US because he will never be in power to do .never
liberals party seems to push the end of prohibition !
http://www.ctvolympics.ca/torch/news/newsid=28005.html
Despite the imposition of a code of silence on Mr. Rebagliati by the federal Liberal Party, for whom he plans to run in the next election, the former Olympian spoke openly about his desire to see marijuana legalized.
"Prohibition didn't work; this isn't working," he said after running with the torch, which some have even said resembles a giant joint.
"You look at the numbers; it's not helping by throwing people in jail. I think the thing we can focus on is helping people with addictions, taking a proactive view.
------------------------------------------------------------------
after ignatieff position on decriminalization we can safely say we have a leverage power with the liberals even if they are not my favourite....the ndp stand zero chance to be in power, too bad i like jack a lot but he CANT DO NOTHING TO HELP US because he will never be in power to do .never
I don't know much about our politics. I do know that I don't like Harper. And I also know that I would like to vote for a party that favours decrim. or legalization at the next election. Can anybody put this in really simple terms for me, or suggest who would get it done the quickest? Peace.
G
Green Supreme
No one will get it done at all till the US tells us its ok for us. Its all just posturing till then. Peace GS
mr noodles
Member
then only party that is in position to block c-15 and proceed to step 1 aka decriminalization is the liberal party of canada.
the ndp which i am a huge fan is , sadly in no position to even bee the opposition . its also easier for an opposition party to make huge statement when they know they will never be in power . way easy when you know you will never have to fulfil all the promised nice idea...even obama said he is not in favor of the legalisation but look at california,colorado and tell me you are not dead jealous !
so far we have two party that can be in power aka government
1- the conservative/reformists...harper and c-15
2- liberals and michael ignatieff , ignatieff stated in public that no one should be criminally penalize by use of marijuana . he said he is no in favor of legalisation but you have all to admit that just decrim is the first important step toward legalization .
it will be a lot easier to ask for the legalization of something that is not criminal anymore than skating over a very illegal position .
thats exactly what the liberals propose a decriminalisation . its maybe not what hardcore pot head expect but legalisation will be done only if we decrim and california legalize .
but for that we got to get rid of harper and the conservative and the only way is not to divide ours vote in 4 party and concentrate our bet on the best horse .
i will simplify this, vote liberals and get decrim, vote ndp/green/bloc and get harper for another 4 years . cannot be more clear than that .
voting liberals is a guaranteed step toward a decriminalization and a giant preparative step for a serious look at the legalisation .
CareFreeLivin
Member
Exactly this. We need focus out efforts or our votes will be split between so many parties that the conservatives will have another stagnant minority government intent on implementing harsher drug penalties. I've voted conservative in the two elections I've been legal for, and I did so in large part because I was unaware of any party's political agenda. Thanks to this thread they will never receive my vote again. Vote Liberal, they're our best shot!
TheHashAssassin
Active member
how about just voting non-confidence instead and not support any of those fuckers. NONE of them care about anyones interests but their own. They will say what they need to get the votes from people, but when has any major politician ever come through on his word, lol.
CareFreeLivin
Member
Though some of what you say may be true, we cannot assume this mentality for the simple fact that it will do us absolutely no good. What we have to do is make our interests their best interest. We can do this if we are able to demonstrate our collective size and power.
TheHashAssassin
Active member
to me tho, that is the whole point of voting non-confidence. If none of those greedy bastards can get any votes from us do their seeming inability to properly represent the people who elected them into office in the first place, then maybe it might send the message home and cause some shaping up within the political partys. food for thought.
mr noodles
Member
thats good on paper only . it will never ever happen in real life . but i do agree on the principle .
we have 1 problem and its steven harper and is bill c-15 that will be brought back in march in is ORIGINAL FORM thats means 1 plant = 6 months and smoking a joints between 2 adults is a traffic charge .
ndp have not even a chance to form the opposition , i like them but zero chance to be in power . no matter we like that or not its the very sad truth and nothing can be changed about it . they will have less than 18 % of the votes .
voting any other party than the liberals guarantee a conservative minority government for another 4 years and thats means 1 plant 6 months ...the last thing we should do is splitting the votes between 4 party that have zero chance to be in power like ndp, green,bloc .
we have no other choice than support ignatieff to get rid of harper and is sad regime . there is no other realistic scenario . no one is available .
ignatieff will stand in the chamber in march and he will vote against c-15 , he got no choice after is public statement about decriminalization and the fact no Canadian should have legal problem for personal use .
yes we will probably go over a federal election over a no vote for the new bill c-15 in a 'marijuana gate '
im not a liberals fans at all but its the only realistic scenario ...otherwise its hell on earth .
We need to influence the next election, we can do this if we stand as a united front.
