Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« Alberta HRC dismisses complaint against Ezra Levant | Main | A feminist critiques libertarianism »

Wednesday, August 06, 2008

Marijuana: Dude, it's illegal!

In October 2007, the Conservative's committed $64 million to The National Anti-Drug Strategy. It's a new program to fight illicit drugs in Canada.

Part of this $64 million went to produce the "Talking with your teen about drugs" pamphlet.

The pamphlet covers all illicit drugs, but much of the space dedicated to explaining the dangers of marijuana is focused on reminding parents that marijuana is in fact illegal.

That's right. It's illegal.

In one the "Did you know?" highlight boxes it reads "Marijuana is illegal. It is a crime to possess, sell, grow or give it to someone. Fines, imprisonment and a criminal record can restrict travel and employment."

We've come a long way from the government-sponsored Reefer Madness anti-drug propaganda of the 1930ties, in which marijuana was linked to murderous rage and almost instant and permanent madness. Even in this Conservative anti-drug propaganda pamphlet, the biggest risks identified with marijuana use are associated with the government's prohibition, not the drug itself.

While the drug war rhetoric might be improving, the success of the drug war is clearly not.  After over 80 years of marijuana prohibition, the government still has to remind parents that it's illegal. And almost 50% of Canadians admit to having used the drug.

(Correction: Reefer Madness was actually produced privately, financed by a church group. That's the right way to produce anti-drug material.)

Posted by Matthew Johnston on August 6, 2008 in Canadian Politics | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b5d69e200e553eece9a8834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Marijuana: Dude, it's illegal!:

Comments

"Marijuana is illegal. It is a crime to possess, sell, grow or give it to someone. Fines, imprisonment and a criminal record can restrict travel and employment."

That's a pretty strong incentive to stop.

Had anyone thought that maybe this was good advice?

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-08-06 7:10:22 PM


This is a topic I struggle with. I am a life-long Conservative, hate the way the Liberals handled the drug "war", and have smoked pot from time to time.

I will say that I am against any legalization of pot, and am also against half the crap the doctors put into us. I do appreciate the Conservatives focus on the law of it, instead of it's effects. I know very succesful people who smoke it, and others that are complete burnouts.

It is a topic many will struggle with until the Liberals, eventually, impose legalization on us.

Just my two bits...

Posted by: Boggy | 2008-08-06 7:27:05 PM


It is, indeed, good advice to follow the law, ZP, even when the law is an ass. I can’t really argue with you there.

Thankfully, though, there are people more reckless with their careers, creature comforts and freedom than you and me...people who are willing to challenge the law openly, namely Marc Emery.

And don’t get me started on the Fugitive Slave Act. :-)

Posted by: Matthew Johnston | 2008-08-06 7:31:15 PM


Heres my idea of what the war on drugs should look like:

(This didn't stay on the air very long. Probably because this sort of thing might work, and we can't have that. The War on Drugs must go on right?)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZSSfSwr0T4

Heres another from the political satire category:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRPxN7DGy5c

Posted by: JC | 2008-08-06 8:02:02 PM


Thanks for your perspective, Boggy.

You wrote: “This is a topic I struggle with. I am a life-long Conservative, hate the way the Liberals handled the drug "war", and have smoked pot from time to time.”

Conservatives should focus on policies that strengthen the family, not policies that strengthen the state. In “What it means to be a libertarian,” Charles Murray makes the point, using a ton of empirical data, that limited government leads to stronger families and a more responsible citizenry.

Since you have used marijuana along with millions of other Canadians, let me ask you a few questions:

Do you think your life would be improved by going to prison for using this drug?

Also, do you think society would be improved by you going to prison?

And finally, do you think law enforcement resources could be better spent on things other than worrying about whether or not you relax at the end of the day with marijuana, while others relax with a beer?

I look forward to your response.

Posted by: Matthew Johnston | 2008-08-06 8:07:43 PM


(1) The direct link to the pamphlet is here:

http://www.nationalantidrugstrategy.gc.ca/pdf/parents/talking-aborder.pdf

(2) In it there are a total of two pages discussing the health risks of cannabis and only one page about the legal risks. In addition, there are six pages about the health risks of various other drugs. Your description of the content of the pamphlet is misleading. Furthermore, the pamphlet explains that the reason for mentioning the legal risks is because "There has been a lot of media coverage about marijuana and the law. There may be confusion about whether or not marijuana is illegal." So the legal information is not merely a section to say don't do it because it is illegal. It is there to remind people that in addition to the two pages of health risks that there are also legal risks they might not have known about.

(3) Having said all that, I support the legalization of cannabis. But I also see nothing wrong with letting people know all the risks that a pot user currently faces, both health and legal risks. I am sure there are also pamphlets about drunk driving that both tell people of the risks of accidents and the legal consequences of getting caught. That makes sense, too.

Posted by: Fact Check | 2008-08-06 8:12:10 PM


Matthew: your use of the Fugitive Slave Law is flawed. While there were many people in the North who opposed it and continued to help escaped slaves, others supported it. They did so because it helped contain the major national sectional divide, they were paid, and because it helped control the black population. The North was far from united on the slavery question. Abolitionists were in fact few in number. More opposed the political and economic power of slavery than its morality. So, therefore, your analogy doesn't work.

So long as drugs are illegal in the US, they will so remain in Canada.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-08-06 8:17:55 PM


Matthew: To answer your questions...the obvious answer is a resounding ..no. But as I said willfully, I do struggle with this issue. But to simplify an obvious contentious issue with two basic questions, that Liberals are tending to ask, is a flaw within itself.

Posted by: Boggy | 2008-08-06 8:30:59 PM


Behold the awesome power of circular logic. That's right folks, you shouldn't do it because it's illegal. And why is it illegal, you ask? Because it is just something that shouldn't be done, and to help drive that point home we outlaw it.

Science and common sense have felled one by one the 'dangers' for which cannabis was originally made illegal, and the DEA is left with the only deterrent they actually control: that someone WILL come throw your ass in jail if you use it. Just ask the state-licensed medical distributors in California...

Posted by: Ken Kesey | 2008-08-06 8:39:47 PM


Thanks for providing the direct link, Fact Check. I picked up the actual pamphlet at my local (legal) drug store and haven’t seen the online version, although it looks the same.

You wrote: “There are a total of two pages discussing the health risks of cannabis and only one page about the legal risks. In addition, there are six pages about the health risks of various other drugs. Your description of the content of the pamphlet is misleading.”

The only real health risk associated with marijuana use found in the pamphlet is that marijuana is harmful to your throat and lungs, unless you consider losing your social inhibitions a health risk.

You also wrote: “Furthermore, the pamphlet explains that the reason for mentioning the legal risks is because ‘There has been a lot of media coverage about marijuana and the law. There may be confusion about whether or not marijuana is illegal.’ So the legal information is not merely a section to say don't do it because it is illegal. It is there to remind people that in addition to the two pages of health risks that there are also legal risks they might not have known about.”

Sure, but after 80 years and millions spent on the war on drugs, the government should not need to remind Canadians that marijuana is illegal. That, my friend, is a failed policy. (Even under the Liberals, $500 million was spent on the War on Drugs, according to the last auditor general's report I've seen.)

Finally, you wrote: “I support the legalization of cannabis. But I also see nothing wrong with letting people know all the risks that a pot user currently faces, both health and legal risks.”

Well rather than letting people know about the legal risks associated with marijuana, the government should remove those risks. (You don’t thank the schoolyard bully for letting you know the risks associated with not giving up your lunch money.) It is perverse that the health consequences of using the drug are less serious than the legal consequences.

(By the way, marijuana connoisseurs will tell you the health risks associated with marijuana smoke can be eliminated by using vaporisers. I didn’t see that helpful “harm reduction” tip anywhere in the pamphlet.)

Posted by: Matthew Johnston | 2008-08-06 8:50:40 PM


Well, the point is, ZP, that abolitionists broke the Fugitive Slave Act in the interest of justice. They broke the law to further justice. They put their freedom and treasure at risk in order to free blacks from slavery.

My only point is that abolitionist used civil disobedience to achieve an admiral goal. Do you accept that it is just to break unjust laws?

Posted by: Matthew Johnston | 2008-08-06 9:19:11 PM


In my own defence, Boggy, it was three questions. :-)

And thanks for taking the time to answer them.

Posted by: Matthew Johnston | 2008-08-06 9:25:27 PM


Matt: there was little civil disobedience. In many Northern states, the authorities simply refused to enforce the law. That's a huge difference.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-08-06 9:49:09 PM


So the goct produced a statement that reminds the public that pot is against the law, Fine- the govt provides the govt position on this subject- their deal is the law as it is written- not how life could be someday-- therefore they did fine

With the criminal underclass releasing inaccurate cannabis news on an almost daily basis ( XYZ % of Canadians want it legal- the pot laws have fallen- pot is de facto legal- , marijuana for medical use is legal etc etc- pot cures cancer etc etc etc )- Maybe it was a good idea for the govt to remind the wipeheads whats what in formal reality from time to time..

these stoner pot news flashes are fanciful projections - not a honest reporting of social reality-- untill such time as social reality changes the present reality reflected in law is the reality we are living with. Don;t like these laws? Change them.. So change efforts are not at all successful ?

well what does that imply ?

Be glad your govt thinks enough of her chemically compromised citizens to alert them that drug theme park promotions they may have believed are not actually happening.

Posted by: 419 | 2008-08-06 10:00:22 PM


How Boring.

See how the US is trying to get the youth:

http://www.abovetheinfluence.com/stoners/

Posted by: Snowrunner | 2008-08-06 10:11:34 PM


(By the way, marijuana connoisseurs will tell you the health risks associated with marijuana smoke can be eliminated by using vaporisers. I didn’t see that helpful “harm reduction” tip anywhere in the pamphlet.)

Posted by: Matthew Johnston | 6-Aug-08 8:50:40 PM

Considering how our Health Minister is utterly ignoring advice from Doctors in Canada and at the WHO as far as safe injection sites go, what exactly do you expect?

This Government is ideologically driven, closely aligned to their brethren in the South and as such the only policiy is to "say no". Damn the consequences, if they stick their fingers deep enough into their ears, squeeze their eyes shut hard enough and keep singing very loudly "nananananana" it will all be fine.

Posted by: Snowrunner | 2008-08-06 10:16:11 PM


Well if people can smoke pot because its there - adults should be able to assume any risks they want- have we reached a point in social evolution where we can skip all -reasonable govt social control legislations?
Let's re -install asbestoes, spray our lawns and remove our automobile seat belts? Fire the lifeguards- let the poor swimmers drown

For the govt to suggest swell new ways to consume contraband, well maybe you are stiil on the waiting list for an apartment in Rochdale- well why not have govt tell us how to cheat on income taxes and instruct illegal aliens how to sneak into Canada.

If you want a govt that caters to drugged up retards, vote for Marc Emery -get the leadership you deserve.
& make that vote count- heck photo copy your ballet and vote several times

Posted by: 419 | 2008-08-06 11:09:00 PM


419: I do think adults should be free to take on any risks they want.

However, it should be pointed out that marijuana is less harmful than alcohol. We have an inconsistent policy--marijuana is illegal, while alcohol is legal, and the reasons for making marijuana illegal is presumably because of the harms associated with it.

Cigarettes are also worse, in terms of your health, than marijuana.

If we want to argue for your paternalistic position, we need to know how much harm is sufficient to justify paternalism. You can change the argument to something else later (like trade with the U.S., for instance), but you'll need to provide a rough guide to how much harm is too much harm, to defend your position.

Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 2008-08-06 11:35:06 PM


Yo there PM.. I don;t think I have to provide a rough or precise guide to show you or anyone else why how or where mow much harm is not too hot, not too cold but just right .. OK? We are discussing the law as it exists, and the information the govt procides to all citizens regarding contraband and the law of the land.

Onnus is on the wipehead minority to provide just cause, based on facts and demonstratable svience to change the drug laws. We are getting a little tired of the intoxicoids blurry fascination with a fanciful and vague sliding scale of harm.

So tell us Hon. social toxin evaluator Mt J- what is more harmful? one 500 lb bear or twenty, 50 lb raccoons?

Personally, I am not interested in meeting up with either harm potentials on garbage day.

Posted by: 419 | 2008-08-07 8:46:05 AM


No worries, 419, you can insist that the onus is on those of us who want the law changed. Although I don't think it is.

The onus is always on those who presume to use guns to change the peaceful behaviour of adults. The onus is always on the government and the governments supporters to prove that they are justified in showing up at my door with guns if I fail to live according to their standards, if I publish offensive cartoons, if I practice a religion you don't like, if I homeschool my kids, and so on.

I offered a reason to change the law. The law is inconsistent. It tells us that smoking cigarettes and drinking alcohol is legal, but smoking pot is illegal. You, not me, offered harm as the standard. So while you may be unpersuaded, I did offer a reason to change either the marijuana laws, or the laws about alcohol and tobacco.

We are both tired, by the way. I happen to be tired of all the busybody nanny state and censorious people sticking their noses into everyone else's business. And you seem to be tired of the burden of having to go be everyones nanny, and of offering arguments without ad hominems.

Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 2008-08-07 8:57:17 AM


Umm..Citizen Jaws what exactly do you do there that govt supporters show up at your door with guns?

and actually you _did start the harm scale ball rolling when you wrote:

".. the reasons for making marijuana illegal is presimably because of the harms ( plural ) associeted with it..."

and so it seems you yourself associate harm(s) with marijuana. The feds have reasoned why pot is verbooten for almost 80 years- 4 generations , it seems you either don;t like this explanation or don;t understand their reasons.

Is that why you are asking me?

hows the bear/raccoon harm evaluation going? do you need more time? But hurry: garbage day is approaching

Posted by: 419 | 2008-08-07 9:13:54 AM


419: Your post at 11:09 precedes my post at 11:35. You brought up harm through risk.

"Umm..Citizen Jaws what exactly do you do there that govt supporters show up at your door with guns?"

Citizen 419, I don't do anything such that gov supporters show up at my door with guns. Gov supporters call on the state to come knocking on our doors with guns.

"and so it seems you yourself associate harm(s) with marijuana. The feds have reasoned why pot is verbooten for almost 80 years- 4 generations , it seems you either don;t like this explanation or don;t understand their reasons."

Yes, there are harms associated with pot. But the harms are self-inflicted, and like I said before, I think self-inflicted harms are fine for adults. I don't think you and I should be telling people how to live their lives, and then go sic the state on them if they don't do what you and I might prefer. (It's fine for us to try and persuade people to live according to 419's preferences).

Also, I used "presumably."

And not only do I not like their reasons, I think their "reasons" are bullshit--they are inconsistent, based on bad science, morally unjustifiable, and destructive. The feds haven't offered reasons for 80 years, they've offered jail cells.

It's the bear.

Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 2008-08-07 9:27:34 AM


thank for choosing the bear

here comes 20 fat raccoons who don't like your reasons..

"...self inflicted harms are fine for adults.."
I think you have crossed from open minded to wind blowing through brain at random. I would hate to live in your indifferent world where we honour & save kids and when their 18th birthday alarm goes off, we drive them to the bridge so they can jump off.

Posted by: 419 | 2008-08-07 10:13:29 AM


These legalization activists sound like slave traders. They tried to defend their actions as harmless and even beneficial too. Tragic.

Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-08-07 10:17:04 AM


419: "I think you have crossed from open minded to wind blowing through brain at random. I would hate to live in your indifferent world where we honour & save kids and when their 18th birthday alarm goes off, we drive them to the bridge so they can jump off."

My world is not indifferent. My world takes the word "honour" seriously. We respect and honour adults when we swallow hard and permit adults to live their own lives according to their own lights. We disrespect and dishonour them when we tell them that they don't know what they're doing, and make them live according to 419's enlightened ability to know what's best for everyone.

Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 2008-08-07 10:20:50 AM


There's irony in your comment, Zebulon. You presume to have the authority to tell adults how to live their lives, and accuse those of us who would give adults the freedom to choose of sounding like slave traders...

Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 2008-08-07 10:23:02 AM


RE: my enlightened ability to know whats best for everybody..
tsk tsk...you big crybaby

next bus to the bridge leaves in 20 mins
we managed to get the raccoons strapped in. theres a seat for anybody who can't handle living with other people, sorry its in the no smoking section.. however, you will be pleased to learn the bear is driving, we respect you to know what you are doing- so climb aboard-
next stop:
the non restraint one way bungee jump

heros only- and honouable adult raccoons

Posted by: 419 | 2008-08-07 11:12:35 AM


There are people who either don't understand prohibition (the public), or have an agenda and use prohibition as a tool (politicians).

If you want an informed voice on the issue, you should ask the 100,000 members of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (www.leap.cc). We are an organization of former or serving Judges, prosecutors and cops. I am a speaker for LEAP.

An idiot who says "It's illegal, I'll follow the law" should be respected as a moonie. A thoughtless mindless follower. Why ask his opinion? He doesn't really have one.

To say that MJ is dangerous is wrong. To say that dangerous things that only affect the inhaler should be illegal is wrong. It is contrary to the foundation of a free society.

But, if harm is the issue: The drug war is full of death and mayhem just like the alcohol prohibition war was. So, if you want to reduce danger - End the drug war. If you want freedom - End the drug war. For more facts from the drug warriors themselves (myself) visit the LEAP site. Fear requires ignorance enlighten yourself and live free.

Posted by: Opinion | 2008-08-07 11:59:11 AM


Opinion: Why not submit an op-ed to the Western Standard?

I'm sure many here would be curious why a former law enforcement officer has decided that drug prohibition is a bad idea.

Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 2008-08-07 12:13:53 PM


PJ: Great idea PJ. I'll get going, PJ.

Posted by: Opinion | 2008-08-07 12:24:28 PM


I should check my post before I send it. That's a lot of PJ's.

Posted by: Opinion | 2008-08-07 12:26:09 PM


Wow- so maybe you should lead the badged eletes to present this undangerous new wipehead gospel to the Unification Church-and then to the Scientologists. and then to whatever faceless enemy ghost you wish..Adterall, theres 5.5 billion people out there who need to be convinced that free market intoxicants is a super idea

Pensioned off or otherwise disengaged Turncoat cops for dope, now thats a show that should be televised. The public will be there as well, but fair warning: we won't understand anything you say- so maybe bring puppets and a guitar. You're up against the safe sex road show, so try harder than you are doing here

Honey, if anybody is sweating fear juice it seems to be you.We strongly suggest yoi get a script writer before you venture out in public again, you need a helpin' hand with basic PR

In the meantime the Drug War carries on with the mid summer heliopter snoop n' torch games and by all indicators contrary to the stoner scoreboard, seems to be winning.

see? thats an opinion. now lets see what you can do with those puppets ..

Posted by: 419 | 2008-08-07 12:36:39 PM


Wow- so maybe you should lead the badged eletes to present this undangerous new wipehead gospel to the Unification Church-and then to the Scientologists. and then to whatever faceless enemy ghost you wish..Adterall, theres 5.5 billion people out there who need to be convinced that free market intoxicants is a super idea

Pensioned off or otherwise disengaged Turncoat cops for dope, now thats a show that should be televised. The public will be there as well, but fair warning: we won't understand anything you say- so maybe bring puppets and a guitar. You're up against the safe sex road show, so try harder than you are doing here

Honey, if anybody is sweating fear juice it seems to be you.We strongly suggest yoi get a script writer before you venture out in public again, you need a helpin' hand with basic PR

In the meantime the Drug War carries on with the mid summer heliopter snoop n' torch games and by all indicators contrary to the stoner scoreboard, seems to be winning.

see? thats an opinion. now lets see what you can do with those puppets ..

Posted by: 419 | 2008-08-07 12:37:20 PM


419: Did your last comment have a point?

I got lost in the metaphor craziness.

Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 2008-08-07 12:41:03 PM


Easy Jaws: Some people insist on being ignorant. 419 seems to have a "stupid 55" plan that works for him. If he won't take advice from 100,000 experienced drug warriors, he won't gain knowledge from anyone. I say we leave him alone and have him self-sentenced to the life of an idiot.

Posted by: Opinion | 2008-08-07 1:18:03 PM


ya, easy Jaws...100,000 turncoat drug warriors on the public dole will have a lot to say..too bad the audience is full of their relatives who have heard it all before , nobody else seems to care about ex almost cops on dope in a permanent belicose/activist mood

so when is your next speaking engagemnent?
-have you _"ever" addressed non stoners ?

where will your next speech be?
-warm up act for the med pot jesters @ Yuk Yuks?


Prohibition is working- thanks to folks like you reminding us how pot makes normal people stupid, amd makes stupid people angry

Marijuana: Dude, it's illegal

Posted by: 419 | 2008-08-08 9:11:29 AM


419 wrote "Prohibition is working."

The CBC reported a study that showed about 70 per cent of those aged 18 to 24 have used marijuana.

Do you really think prohibition is working, 419?

http://westernstandard.blogs.com/shotgun/2008/07/does-canada-hav.html

Posted by: Matthew Johnston | 2008-08-08 1:58:34 PM


do you really think the CBC is a fair, balanced credible social core sample presenter? I don't

Posted by: 419 | 2008-08-08 7:38:37 PM


Newsflash!!!

419 reports the drug war is working. The report says that just another 80 years of violence and everything is expected to turn out OK.

In other reports 419 says Vietnam will end soon and the Soviet economy is right on track. The Kyoto accord is expected to save the world.

Posted by: Sarcasm | 2008-08-08 7:46:00 PM


CBC was reporting about a study done by the Canadian Addiction Survey, they didn't commission the study themselves, 419.

Unless, of course, you have reason to doubt them as well...

Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 2008-08-08 7:52:49 PM


70% of young persons try pot-
ok so what?
Is that a good thing?
70% of young people drive too fast..
so what?
99% of everybody speeds sometimes.. so what? ecen though speeding in itself is not dangerous- loss of controll while speeding certainly is dangerous..

Highway Speed prohibition mechanism is out there searching for offenders 24-7 , working to overcome expanding speeder agendas . no sane person would not dismantle speed radar, reduce fines for speeding or defend a speeders loss of license..speeding goes on, speed traps go on..

so likewise the pot prohibition machine will continiue neutralizing intoxicated behaviour and the pot black market wherever it is found. prohibition will not go away just because it interferes with your choice to self drug

Do you really believe that any degree of stoner maximus will overtake world societal displeasire with the cannabis intoxicated lifetyle, or that the rule of law will just surrender to vice?

this thread is " Marijuana" Dude , its illegal" and we both suspect it will likely stay that way for many more decades .

Posted by: 419 | 2008-08-08 9:57:31 PM


I have one of the most fought for things in North America!!

Billions of Your Tax Money Spent on, Policing, Court Battles, Lawyers Fees, Wars between Tribes and Nations, Gun fights and Death!

All so I have a License to Smoke POT!!

Yes a Health Canada License to Grow and Use Medical MJ!!

I can go anywhere in Canada and SMOKE MY Medical MJ!

I can Grow My Medical MJ anywhere I want in Canada with the Landowners Permission!

I am one of the Luckiest People in North America!!

I have one of the most fought over things in North America!!!!!

But?

It is completely and utterly worthless!!!

I have a Federal Government License to USE IT, "BUT" must BREAK THE LAW TO GET IT, and or the Land owner who allows me to GROW IT Goes to JAIL for My Plants!!!

All at TAX Payer Expense!!!!!

I had a big misconception that Medical MJ was used for Medical Purposes to Help the Sick!

I have come to the conclusion that if and only if I buy NDP backed SEED sales, that My Government Of Canada licensed Garden of My Medical Mj Plants, will have even a chance of Maturity to be Used!

I have asked My MP and several others to explain this!

Some MPs have responded that MY MP is the only one that can help me!

My MP Closed my File!

My MP is NDP!

Members of the NDP Party have VERY Close connections to Mj Seed sales, that are sold in several Countries as well as Canada, where it is a CRIME to plant them!!!

Law enforcement members are Dieing to collect NDP Backed SEEDS, after they are planted!!!

My Federal Government License to SMOKE POT, is not even worth the STAMP to renew, as it just helps The NDP in keeping it illegal and Play Both Sides while making People think they care, and make Black Market Billions all at the same time!

That is not helping the sick!

That is not helping Canada!

That is not helping me explain to my Kids, that Dad only breaks the BAD LAWS of CANADA but will die to preserve them!!

If I am off track?

Now is your chance to tell me!

Tell me I'm wrong, but give me the truth, not a NDP Snow Job!

I have one of the most fought over THING in North America!!

But it just ain't worth it!

We all need the final answer!
We just all must know it at the same time, so we can hold the Government to the Decision!!
Not just leave it up to the money driven courts to make their appointed choices for every case, as a case by case bases, determined by others that decide if it is worthy of a trial or just not in public interest? That way the courts are as busy as they want and just gobble up tax money at HOW MUCH / Hour?

Court File No. 33878

10:00 am. Pacific Time, September 8, 2008
Courtenay Law Courts
420 Cumberland Road,
Courtenay, British Columbia
V9N 2C4

TTFN
Bruce

Posted by: Bruce Webb | 2008-08-09 8:33:48 PM


I should never have believed that Medical MJ, was used for Medical purposes? I should have just been like the over 400,000 Canadians that use it illegal for Medical purposes!
I was stupid enough to go get a Government of Canada License for the stuff. As soon as I did, they had the address on my license to where to send the COPS!
I should have just grown the stuff like everyone else, and bought my seeds from the Pot Union / NDP Party Members!
TTFN
RDT


Posted by: Bruce Webb | 2008-08-10 10:47:17 PM


Federal NDP Leader Jack Layton was here!
"He was in town to meet with North Island MP Catherine Bell and discuss issues affecting her constituency."
Front Page of the Comox Valley Record, WED August 6, 2008.
Ha! Ha! Ha!
I wonder what they are talking about?
Did no one ask?
If they are "issues affecting her constituency", and we live here should we not KNOW?
WHY NOT?
TTFN

Posted by: Bruce Webb | 2008-08-11 9:55:31 PM


CBC The Hour Did a Show "Pot Union".
I blog'ed it! and pushed it to # 1 commented in news Canada today on you tube!
I just look at My NDP File Being Closed By MY MP, and this show.
Even the Fact the Next Mayor of Vancouver is NDP, and NDP party Members selling seeds. My garden was not NDP touched so was Raided? If these guys mailed seeds the Know their address?
Why would The RCMP want to put their life at risk or waist their resources to bust a Health Canada Licensed Medical MJ Garden that belonged to a Disabled Veteran, with the name and address on the Health Canada License. When they should be busy enough, just tracking down NDP seeds that get planted in Canada?
UNION NDP Seeds?
Planted?
Trains Tunnels, Plains, automobiles!
Who did they buy the TRAINS from?
What Union Reads the Power meters?
What Government Party BACKS the UNION the MOST?
People are Crazy! They must be to think some Terrorist like Bin-laden is a "genius", for getting a couple pilots, to buy plane tickets and carry a BOX CUTTER!!
Please Remember that The NDP wants OUR RIGHTS GIVEN to Terrorist like him!!! Also If he makes it here They will keep him safe from the world!!!
Just ask, if they will give him to the USA!!
Ha! Ha! Ha!
Lets all just use our HEADS!
Not just follow the NEWS!
TTFN
RDT

Posted by: Bruce Webb | 2008-08-11 10:16:39 PM


I should also POINT OUT, that I have been informing the LOCAL and NATIONAL MEDIA, this information for YEARS!!!
So when the LEADER OF A FEDERAL PARTY!! MUST COME all the way HERE?
"He was in town to meet with North Island MP Catherine Bell and discuss issues affecting her constituency."
The Media already KNEW WHY HE WAS HERE!!
You just do not have the RIGHT TO KNOW!!
TTFN
RDT

Posted by: Bruce Webb | 2008-08-12 6:16:14 PM


Surprise!!
I was in court today!!!
It was a preliminary hearing to Do preliminarily things Dealing with the Crime that is not a Crime?
I was mostly floored by the fact, that the mental fitness of someone that has for several YEARS has had no choice but to represent them selves in several different COURT appearances as a Lawyer in the very Courts that are using guessing at their mental fitness to proceed in a Trial for a Crime that is not a Crime?
Now I must say that, is only the way I see it, but as the main topic was about the Court appointed Lawyer that Quit the case, who should be able to or know who might be able to explain to the defendant of the TRIAL, what they are to defend against, before the TRIAL starts on 8 September 2008?
Now with there being a Doctors report in question on the mental capacity of the defendant of the Trial, being questioned by the Court to determinants the mental fitness of the Defendant to determinate if the TRIAL for the Crime that is not a Crime should proceed or not, after the defendant appeared after driving to the preliminary Court date to determinate the the Request for a Lawyer be Heard on the first day of the TRIAL, for the crime that is not a crime on the 8 September 2008, and that the matter of Mental fitness being the FIRST MATTER being dealt with, at the TRIAL for the Crime the is not a crime, and the defense who is both Lawyer and defendant in the Trial for the Crime that is not a crime, will not have the chance to know what they are on Trial for, with out a lawyer that was to be appointed that was capable of mounting a defense for the crime that is not a crime, after being able to explain what the crime was that we are to defend against since there was no CRIME?

Plain and simple, while the defendant was stressed over being a lawyer and everyday farmer, they were locked up and given mind altering Drugs, and monitored by the Doctor that wrote the report to be used to determine the fitness on the FIRST DAY of trial!
While the defendant was locked up and Drugged the CROWN continued to serve them papers to do with the TRIAL, with out yet explaining What the CRIME was that they were the defendant in.
I know that must be read slowly?
I was there and heard what I heard, and saw what I saw.
The defendant was growing MY PLANTS!
The defendant is on TRIAL for MY PLANTS!
The defendant is simply confused as to WHY I sit and watch their life fall apart, not guilty of the Crime the defendant is going to TRIAL for the Crime that is not a Crime?
Now with there being some mention, some where in regards to dilutions that are being used to determine the mental fitness of the Defendant, I must point out, that I am in no way an Identical twin, for that matter not even related at all, but I have the same delusions of there being something wrong!!
Hello, twice I put my hand on the Bible in court dealing with the crime that is not a crime, that the Crown is holding a TRIAL for and said! “ THE PLANTS ARE MY PLANTS!”
I did not have a license for them? As it was TX 18 hours before the RAID on a SUNDAY at the ADDRESS on MY TX'd License to Grow Medical MJ!
Yet the Crown wants to take the report from a Doctor that prescribe mind altering drugs to the Defendant that still don't know why there is a trial!
The only defense is to point out how many other Trials were held for the Same Crime that is not a crime, that has been a reason for RCMP officers to Die, Disabled Veterans to the Street for Medications for their VAC Pensioned Condition, waist of Billions of Tax money that might help Canadian have food and shelter?
I'm sorry?
Cause I'm having that darn dilution again!
I should be sitting beside the Defendant as a defendant, for the crime that is not a crime, not in the back watching a Canadian who is begging for someone to simply explain what the crime was that the TRIAL that starts 8 September 2008 is so they may defend them selves?
As it is we have a very distressed defendant going to Trial, Defending them self, and only defense is? For the Crime of?
But the first thing to be done is determines the mental fitness to proceed with the TRIAL!!!
I still don't know why I'm not sitting there to as a dilution defendant?
The plants were my plants, and I must be just as dilution , cause as a Disabled Veteran who suffers chronic pain, that met and exceeded the Health Canada requirements to use Medical MJ for My Veterans Affairs Canada Pensioned Condition, but must buy from NDP Backed Black Market seeds that get planted here, and sold as STREET Drugs!
Now as you all KNOW my NDP MP C Bell, just closed my file begging for help, but did you know C Bell MP will not even answer the hand delivered letters or the e-mails of the Defendant in the TRIAL for the CRIME that is not a CRIME, that I have not been even charged with?
!!!!!!!!!!THE SAME PLANTS!!!!!!!!!
The SAME PLANTS that I tried to report stolen to the RCMP!
The same plants I filed a RCMP Complaints Commission about, because the Local Detachment would not let me report the CRIME or Theft!
The same Plants!!!
There are lots of Canadians that are having the same dilution that MJ is legal!
Ha! Ha! Ha!
Yep, thats what the word on the street is, and it's also the ruling of most of the Court decisions that are the only defense for prosecution for a Crime that is Not a CRIME!!

Now I must be honest, I am very soar right now!!
I can seem to understand what I did hear and what I saw, as the Security at the Court house reacted when the lady up front jumped out of her Chair and snapped her fingers, while waving her arms after the Judge hung up while the defendant begged for help?
I do know how the posture of the staff changed once it was operant that I, one of two people there to watch, was linked to the defendant!
I understand that's their job, and would do the same if I thought a middle aged frustrated Canadian yelled at a phone after the defendant was HUNG UP ON, buy the JUDGE during a Preliminarily hearing to a Trial for a Crime that is not a Crime?
They will more than likely file a report that will also be used along with the Doctors to determinant the Mental Fitness, that is the FIRST THING to be dealt with at the TRIAL, and the second thing is get a lawyer appointed to help prepare a defense, for the Trial that started with the Doctors Report on Mental Fitness of the Defendant/lawyer, that was recored and written while the Defendant/Lawyer, was locked up and given Mind altering Drugs, under court order and served court papers while there?
So I'm now going to go take my STREET DRUGS that My NDP MP C Bell has Forced me to use for my Veterans Affairs Disability and pensioned condition by simply closing my file, knowing no other MP can help me, cause SHE IS MY MP!
Then I'll post some replies to this entry, perhaps even shake that dilution that jumps from person to person like a demon, that must be removed, that has Canadians and the world thinking MJ is legal and Medical MJ is used for Medical Purposes!!
Ha! Ha! Ha!
TTFN
Bruce Webb

Posted by: Bruce Webb | 2008-08-19 6:07:36 PM



The comments to this entry are closed.