Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« Jason Cherniak Throws in the Towel | Main | Liberals Start to Worry »

Thursday, September 25, 2008

Green Party plan for marijuana reform unworkable: Libertarian Party

Libertarian Party candidate Krista Zoobkoff today launched her campaign in the federal riding of Wild Rose with a press conference with party leader Dennis Young.

Zoobkoff and Young released the party’s strategy for marijuana policy reform at a Canmore hemp store owned by 29-year-old entrepreneur Zoobkoff, who also owns businesses in Banff and Airdrie.

The party’s three-part strategy for reforming Canada’s approach to marijuana policy includes:

Legalize the cultivation, sale and use of marijuana by adults

• After 80 years of prohibition, at least 10 million Canadians have still used marijuana. Legalizing the cultivation and sale of marijuana will ensure the safe, peaceful trade of a drug that is substantially less harmful than alcohol or tobacco.

Pardon and expunge the convictions of all non-violent marijuana law offenders

• 600,000 Canadians have criminal records for marijuana possession. These criminal records make international travel difficult or impossible and can limit employment opportunities. The Libertarian Party would pardon Canadians with non-violent marijuana convictions.

Stop the extradition of Canadian magazine publisher Marc Emery to the U.S.A.

• Canadian magazine publisher and political activist, Marc Emery, will spend the rest of his life in an American prison for selling marijuana seeds unless the Canadian governments asserts its sovereignty over drug policy and stops the politically motivated extradition trial against him by the American Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA).

“The prohibition of cannabis is more damaging to society than the plant itself,” Zoobkoff told reporters. “The war on drugs is a war on the Canadian people. It can’t be fully enforced, cost taxpayers too much, and breeds violence and organized crime,” she continued.

Party leader Dennis Young said “the Libertarian Party is the only party with a comprehensive strategy for ending marijuana prohibition and ending the organized crime associated with the trade in marijuana.” He was also critical of the Green Party plan for marijuana policy reform.

“Elizabeth May and the Green Party should be congratulated for not running from the important issue of marijuana policy reform, but her plan is unworkable. It will not take the organized crime out of the marijuana trade. Legalizing marijuana for personal use will do nothing to restore peaceful trade in the marijuana business. We must legalize the cultivation and sale of marijuana and take the violence out of the marijuana business once and for all,” said Young.

Young also called on May to publicly oppose the extradition of marijuana legalization activist Marc Emery, who faces an extradition hearing -- scheduled to take place between February 9 –17, 2009 -- that could land him in a US prison for the remainder of his life. The Minister of Justice is responsible for the implementation of the Extradition Act an has the authority to prevent Emery from being prosecuted in the US for selling marijuana seeds, or, alternatively, to charge Emery in Canada for the same offence, the penalty for which in Canada is only a small fine.

“May must commit to restoring Canadian sovereignty over drug policy by joining the Libertarian Party in working actively to prevent the extradition of Canadian publisher and activist Marc Emery to the US for selling marijuana seeds. Will Elizabeth May stop the extradition of Marc Emery? If she won’t, she is not serious about a made-in-Canada approach to drug policy,” said Young.

Young is calling his strategy an "adult" approach to drug policy, one that trusts adult Canadians with choice and is realistic and honest about the failure of marijuana prohibition.

“After 80 years of prohibition, at least 10 million Canadians have still used marijuana, and the number is probably higher. We need to be honest with ourselves. The war on marijuana has been lost, and, despite the best intentions of policy makers, it is doing more harm than good. We must legalize the cultivation, sale and use of marijuana in the interest of public safety, public health and personal liberty,” concluded Young.


(Picture: Libertarian Party candidate Krista Zoobkoff outside her Canmore hemp store)

Posted by Matthew Johnston on September 25, 2008 in Canadian Politics | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Green Party plan for marijuana reform unworkable: Libertarian Party:



"are you saying cannabis users are homeless or want money???? "

Nice try. I am implying that I would gleefully step over a pot smoker in -40c temps seeing as how they spent their money, time, and energy getting high rather than preparing for the harsh winters.

Other than that, toke away. Just don't jump in front of my car.

What has pot done for me, personally...

Two words...

Apocalypse Now.

No... Zeppelin's Dazed and Confused

Wait...Monty Python's Meaning of Life...

yeah...that's it.

Posted by: h2o273kk9 | 2008-09-27 12:42:39 AM


"are you saying cannabis users are homeless or want money???? "

Nice try. I am implying that I would gleefully step over a pot smoker in -40c temps seeing as how they spent their money, time, and energy getting high rather than preparing for the harsh winters.

Other than that, toke away. Just don't jump in front of my car.

What has pot done for me, personally...

Two words...

Apocalypse Now.

No... Zeppelin's Dazed and Confused

Wait...Monty Python's Meaning of Life...

yeah...that's it.

Posted by: h2o273kk9 | 2008-09-27 12:45:24 AM

so you are fine with it as long as they dont harm you or your property. i think that is very fair and falls into line with what i think. we have agreed.

Posted by: krista zoobkoff | 2008-09-27 12:50:20 AM

Have we agreed. Really? After all, I pay a considerable amount of taxes for health care, road maintenance, etc.

Are the unemployed tokers using this system without paying?

If they are employed and contributing, I fully understand your position...if not, we disagree.

Posted by: h2o273kk9 | 2008-09-27 1:34:33 AM

Shane Matthews:

Sorry, dude. I thought you were simply an emotionally unstable flake. I didn't know you were doing it For The Children. Specifically your own (adopted?). That makes your free-lance fascism all okay. As long as your life is governed by fear, and Fear of What Other People Are Doing, then it is okay for you to advocate, in the most pseudo-morally panicked way possible for us all, including our children, to be imprisoned in a a world where the government micromanages botanical substances in our blood streams and restricts our access to them.

Sorry about my first post, too, wherein I said "dyspeptic"... that should read "dystopian". Now step off, dipshit.

Posted by: LVM | 2008-09-27 1:47:16 AM

1 in 5 Canadians has used Cannabis-
thats 20% of the population

Same Math

4 in 5 Canadians have not used cannabis
thats 80% of the population

not all of the 20% user group moved beyond initial experimentation so we can say with some certainty that 5-7 % of Canadians are regular adult recreational users.

& it can be shown that 93- 95% of Canadians
do _not use cannabis in any way at all

Posted by: 419 | 2008-09-27 10:58:32 AM

Why create a Socialist military state like North Korea when you can created a Socialist Doped up state like Canada.

Posted by: Paul | 26-Sep-08 11:54:39 PM

Paul, are you not contradicting yourself?
We already have a socialist state. Largely due to the endless empty laws of control put forth for the "greater good".
Freedom includes the right to sit in your own back yard and drink a beer right?
So why not a little grass?
Morally speaking....is it supposed to be ok to say that we are "free" to use one intoxicant but not the other? And who gets to decide?
There are already laws in place to deal with criminal behaviour however it is motivated.
Just a thought...

Posted by: JC | 2008-09-27 11:05:54 AM

Sorry, dude. I thought you were simply an emotionally unstable flake. I didn't know you were doing it For The Children. Specifically your own (adopted?). That makes your free-lance fascism all okay. As long as your life is governed by fear, and Fear of What Other People Are Doing, then it is okay for you to advocate, in the most pseudo-morally panicked way possible for us all, including our children, to be imprisoned in a a world where the government micromanages botanical substances in our blood streams and restricts our access to them.

Sorry about my first post, too, wherein I said "dyspeptic"... that should read "dystopian". Now step off, dipshit.

Posted by: LVM | 27-Sep-08 1:47:16 AM

Best laugh I've had today. Good one!

Posted by: JC | 2008-09-27 11:07:54 AM


1. Of course! Nothing means anything unless you say it does. How much easier it is to win an argument with a Force like that at your back. The relative frequency of use was in relation to the gateway effect, not on how it impacted what legal status it ought to have.

2. Well, actually, no, it isn’t. Because marijuana does not promote life, liberty, nor security of the person, because it doesn’t cure anything. Note Section 1, which says that all the rights contained in the Charter are subject to reasonable limitation by law. Google “marijuana brain damage.” The case for soy and plastic is far from proven. And quit harping on the LD-50 thing; I’ve already told you why it’s not the only factor in play.

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-09-27 11:30:36 AM

Considered a super food by who, Krista? Do you know how much seed you'd have to eat to round out a repast? Tell me, if cannabis is such a wonderful plant, why did cultivation drop off steadily in the 19th century, even while it was legal? And don't tell me it was DuPont; they weren't even incorporated until 1915.

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-09-27 11:34:08 AM

LVM wrote: “Sorry, dude.”

That’ll be the day.

LVM wrote: “I thought you were simply an emotionally unstable flake.”

And I thought you had absolutely nothing to contribute to the discussion itself but were instead just a skanky little troll.

LVM wrote: “I didn't know you were doing it For The Children.”

They have nothing to do with it.

LVM wrote: “Specifically your own (adopted?).”

BZZZTT! Wrong again. Shocker, that.

LVM wrote: “That makes your free-lance fascism all okay.”

Outlawing pot = fascism? How many times have I heard that. Actually, a better question would be, “How many times have I seen it proven?” The answer, of course, being zero.

LVM wrote: “As long as your life is governed by fear, and Fear of What Other People Are Doing, then it is okay for you to advocate, in the most pseudo-morally panicked way possible for us all, including our children, to be imprisoned in a a world where the government micromanages botanical substances in our blood streams and restricts our access to them.”

That’s quite a sermon coming from the living personification of Godwin’s Law.

LVM wrote: “Sorry about my first post, too, wherein I said "dyspeptic"... that should read "dystopian". Now step off, dipshit.”

Gonna make me, chicken dung who won’t give his real name? Guess it’s easy to snipe from behind a cloak of anonymity. Not that you’d know what the alternative is like. Now go play outside.

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-09-27 11:43:01 AM

Don't get me wrong. I'm not in disagreement in principle with you on this issue.

It's just that it is naive, pales in comparison to the really big stuff related to our freedoms, and says absolutely nothing about what you would do to protect us from those who do and would abuse pot causing me hardships.

I really don't care if they smoke it and jump off of bridges, however, I do care if they land on my car.

Does that clarify why I find you vacuous and single minded on this issue?

i would like to put the issue to rest as well. i stromgly disagree that it is pales in comparison to the really big stuff. i also understand that you disagree with me and am not going to try to convince you other wise. i beleive you are an intelligent person and hope you are open minded. if someone is harming you or frauding you by using cannabis then they should face the full extent of the law and also pay back property damages. i would not punish someone who causes harm to you or you property while involved with cannabis harsher than someone who harms your property for other reasons. i am sorry if someone has hurt you because of cannabis but im sure you agree that its not the majority.

like i said, if i was a one issue candidate, i would have become a candidate for the marijuana party. i will dedicate my time and energy without pay to stand up for free speech, freedom to defend ourselves, freedom to security of my person ( if that means using medicine i see fit to help me feel better even if that medicine does not cure me or if my doctor disagrees (i am trying to answer two questions here), freedom of the security of my property. the authoritarian attitude of our government scares me.

Posted by: krista zoobkoff | 2008-09-27 1:56:28 PM

Shane matthews, hemp production dropped in the late 19th century due to the internal combustion engine and its use on ships. 90% of all ships used hemp for their sails, in fact the U.S.S Constitution had 60 tons worth of hemp sails alone.

The earliest known woven fabric was apparently made of hemp, which began to be worked in the eighth millennium (8,000-7,000BC)
Columbia History of the World, 1981, page 54.

So i guess the fact that marijuana will control epileptic seizures and is frequently prescribed by canadian physicians to epilepsy patients isn't enough to prove to you marijuana is medicine

How about the fact that marijuana has cured cancerous tumors in lab research studies dating back as far as the 70's?

Forgive me for saying it but your responses to the people on this message board have been overly arrogant and the information you have been putting forth for the most part has been complete bull

Marijuana has never killed anyone, putting drug sales in the hands of organized criminals has killed more innocent people then any drug.

Posted by: Toby | 2008-09-27 3:01:11 PM


1. Interesting, although the 90% figure seems a little high. Cotton was a very important crop in the southern United States and sails canvas is easily made from cotton duck.

2. Most unbiased sources I could find state that the earliest known fabric dates to around 3000 BC. However, the 8000 BC factoid turns up on page after page of pro-marijuana sites. So in the absence of an electronically verifiable and UNBIASED link, I call bullshit. In any case, hemp’s usefulness as an industrial fibre has never been dispute, although how relevant it is today in the face of linen, wool, cotton, and synthetics is questionable.

3. Marijuana can HELP control epileptic seizures. So can many other drugs.

4. Horseshit. Marijuana can help relieve nausea for patients on chemo, but that’s it. Marijuana also causes mild to moderate immunosuppression and tachycardia. The risk is low to healthy patients, but in the at-death’s-door specimens usually calling for medical marijuana, the risk is significantly elevated.

5. You knew about one thing I didn’t—hemp sails—and suddenly you’re an expert? Okay, then, let’s have you answer the question that no one else wants to tackle. Since much of the pot grown by organized crime is for export to the U.S., and since pot would remain illegal in the U.S., how would legalizing it here curb organized crime?

6. Then people should stop doing it. It is the consumers, not the government, who has put the drug sales in the hands of criminals. As I’ve said before, if people didn’t buy marijuana regardless of legality, the crooks wouldn’t bother. If you buy dope from anyone but a grower you know has no connection to organized crime, you are an accessory to that crime. Not only do you not have the moral higher ground, but you’d have to be hoisted out of a pit.

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-09-27 5:06:44 PM

Ok, so If marijuana were to be legalized we could divert the millions we spend on marijuana law enforcement towards stopping crimes at the border like illegal marijuana exporting.
Police wouldn't have to bother with possession and trafficking laws, there only concern would be export/import.

As for the hemp sails just search about the war of 1812 and russian hemp supply, a very interesting read regardless of your opinion towards hemp.

As for cannabis not curing cancers





As for #6

People aren't ever going to stop, you can do whatever sick sadistic shit you want to us but we still ain't gonna stop. Prison, torture, death penalty .......these are all fates marijuana users around the world face. We still don't stop. You can't stop us ever
So if you want organized crime to continue growing in your cities by all means support prohibition.

Posted by: Toby | 2008-09-27 7:26:29 PM

Well krista zoobkoff, welcome to the world of politics. I like your platform, your pic and your open attitude.

As I said in the other forum, I'm running for Vancouver city council and have been campaigning now since the beginning of September. I'm independent and taking the unconventional route. It's working for me. I'm having fun and the people whom I meet say that they are going to support me. We have a proportional system and many feel that they can afford to give me a vote.

The Bud Hat was a windfall of good karma for me. I created it a couple of years ago and refined it getting bolder about wearing it full time.

I call it interpretive art and it brings out the best in the kind of people who have affinity with my type, although I do get a couple of scowls daily. Mostly its like having about a thousand friends a week walk by, smile and say a few words.

It also brings out the very best in me, a fine mix of happy confidence. I'm always "on" in spontaneous fun encounters, if not there is good reciprocal live comedy when meeting other very eccentric outgoing people.

In these forums there are concentrations of many who are shunned by regular people and who find themselves in a spiral dive of anti socialism and hatred, because they are born that way. They hide in their warrens and lash out personally as they do in real life. You'll learn to leave them to it, as I am mastering, because anyone with half a brain will be able to bypass their drivel easily, as I do, laughing at the insane number of vacuous points that they project with venom at me showing me directly how effective my words have been.

I've found in my life, and reaffirmed by this adventure of running for office, that the large part of humanity is very decent. and if you like people, as you must to try this, it can be fun.

I'm sure that the only way to go with legalization, that we might realize all the benefits not just reap taxes while leaving a large part of the crime intact, is to allow it to become as common as tomatoes.

At one time I tried making my own wine, and for a while I enjoyed a great variety of home brews for pennies, without getting out of control. This plant for me is a tonic which I enjoy and is no one elses business.

the government has no right being involved, because it is a health tonic for me. There is no room to jack some sin taxes out of me for something that I treat as I do garlic.

That's how it was before Prohibition and I will be damned that the government gets to score big time out of making me a criminal, now. Fack you taxers of natural health products and religious morons, I'll be wanting you to pay for CO2 emissions, before I pay taxes on something good for me like garlic, that I can provide for myself for next to nothing.

I want nothing less than total amnesty for this health inducing plant which allows me to live the way I please without interfering with anyone else.

There will be no jacking me up for taxes that these corrupt chameleons give to their corporate buddies and senior bureaucrats.

When people talk to me on the campaign trail they are usually happy talking about general issues and know about as much about the city issues as I do. Be true to yourself and know that when someone is attacking you with vigor, that you have touched them with you presence.

Good Luck! I'd vote for you.

Posted by: budoracle | 2008-09-27 7:59:52 PM

...krista take no offence to my ditzy remark personally, but that photo does you no justice in trying to come across as a serious contender of changing the steriotypical image that goes with Hemp.

Posted by: tomax7 | 2008-09-27 9:40:10 PM

1. Great. We’ll just be moving the expenditure from A to B. So we really won’t be saving anything, will we?

2. And electricity theft, violent competition among the gangs that would remain, damaged/destroyed housing, guns still coming north…So tell me again what incentive we have to legalize it, other than pleasing you?

3. Did I say hemp couldn’t be woven into fabric? Do you know why we no longer use it? Because we found other fabrics that do the job better.

4. These studies are merely promising early results. There is no scientific consensus that cannabis may help cure cancer. Even if it does, it will most likely be perfused via IV or injected, not smoked. I’m not against extracting useful chemicals from any plant, including hemp, as I’m sure you can guess. My beef is with illegal recreational use.

5. Oh, that’s real mature, Toby. I’m glad I finally got one of you to come out and admit it—you’re just fine with blood for pot. You’ll endure gunplay, you’ll endure neighbourhoods going up in flames, you’ll endure anything, so long as you can light up and get high. You’d rather bring the world crashing down around you than give up your weed. You are that selfish; you are that stupid; your survival instincts are that poor. Thanks for confirming EVERYTHING I have been saying all along. Good show.

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-09-27 9:52:11 PM

Toby said,
"So i guess the fact that marijuana will control epileptic seizures and is frequently prescribed by canadian physicians to epilepsy patients isn't enough to prove to you marijuana is medicine"

Just another real life story. I started smoking pot while I was attending one of Canada's most prestigious Private schools in 1964.(I was the first and it is now known as the most Cannabis ridden one of the bunch) It was not my fault that the supervision was slack and I got to skip out on an adventure with a buddy from TO who had knowledge of such things. You'd think that for the money that was being paid for me to attend that there would have been a more secure premises.

When I became a regular smoker (perhaps 3 or 4 times per week) at 15 I noticed that my occasional epileptic seizures became less frequent. At 16 I tried LSD for the first time (the legendary purple micro dot).

I have left a steady daily dose of pharmacuticals behind at the age of 16. I have never taken Trimedone, Dilatin, or phenobarb since then.

Its just anecdotal, but I also know another former Epileptic who has been without a seizure for decades since they took up daily toking.

My Grandmother was a midwife and an herbal medicine woman, who would have prescribe this to me for the seizures if she were alive and allowed to practice her skills.

I remember her community garden in Cologne, She was a wise woman, very independent and thrifty.

Made her way successfully as a single mother during the second world war, saving herself and her two daughters from the bombing of Dresden. She would scoff at the though that the government would have the right to control such a thing.

And she would spit at the stupid Americans who would bomb civilians from afar on the pretext of lies, and pretend to be holier than thou, about plants on these forums.

Posted by: budoracle | 2008-09-27 10:35:45 PM

thank you so much budoracle.
tomax7. i did take offence to your comment. i have that car for my business as it is the best bang for my buck as fas as advertising goes. the photographer asked for a pic by my car and i saw no reason to say no. i dont know how you think i didnt look serious. was it the smile. i have been quite self consious about myself after i read your comment. i know that is for me to deal with and i dont blame you for how i feel. i respect your freedom of judgement. i do hope you dont judge peoples intelligence based on photos. i was standing by a car.
shane. i think you are very intelligent and i beleive your heart is in the right place. i am sorry for your wife having ms but think she is in good hands. i enjoy reading your posts and think you bring up good points but i do disagree. i think these are inprotant issues and it is good to get another perspective. i respect what you have to say and think that you have been fair to me.

Posted by: krista zoobkoff | 2008-09-27 10:52:53 PM

Maybe all epilepsy is is a lack of THC / iods on their neural receptors? Maybe some people are born with a lack of self the body made equivalent, a genetic deficiency.

Certainly for a daily user such as I there comes a small euphoria to stave off unnecessary sadness, a bit of creative dreaming to enjoy my world and cook up some new adventures & schemes, fiction, activism, its all a wonderful stew for me, am I'm continuously trying to impact my world in a good way.

I will never understand why I must be a criminal for wanting this pleasure and healthy side effects from a natural product. Pharmas are constantly searching for such a thing and I have it for myself already, given to me be nature. Screw Mr. Harper and his foreign policies.

When I consume it no one can notice any impaired performance or dangerous patterns, I've flown long distances without power, driven and retired an unblemished professional driver's license, and currently can bike holding my dog's leash in tandem with him on the seawall/sidewalks safely without ever touching anyone, while also holding campaign fliers in my left hand. Impaired is not the first thing that comes to peoples minds as they notice my skill born of motocross, on two wheels at the age of almost sixty. My handshake strong and vital, my smile genuine. I can't understand why we still have politicians in power that wish to garner votes by denigrating people like me.

I can enter any group of people spontaneously and get good genuine reactions 95% of the time with people promising to take a look as they take pamphlets. I can join in with people in conversation on any subject. I have among my friends cancer researchers, judges, cops, even lawyers and crack heads too. I don't fear walking anywhere and have no ill feelings towards anyone. I have demonstrated a clear social conscience and earn my living, thankfully not enough to pay taxes to this criminal organization enforcing tyranny upon me. There are thousands like me who are proud of his but have a lot of money that they wish to hide. The Harpers of this world have made them rich and look like they are bent on doing so forever.

I am proud to say that I can regularly go two days without spending any money, and often three. I cause no pollution for others to deal with directly and yes I am cutting down on meat (Especially as I've met another vegetarian and consider this a sign)

So what the Fack is the government doing trying to make a criminal out of a normal, good citizen like me. Now multiply this tens of thousands of times and I see true indications of social insanity, as dangerous as what took place in Jonestown. Remember that one?

I'm occasionally still haunted by the visions of the bloated bodies. Yes pot makes a bit les testosterone enhanced. More sensitive and perhaps emotional. I like it that way, so get off my back you morons. And I like to be epileptic seizure free, as well as not having the side effects of those pharmacuticals.

No way has the government ever demonstrated a valid reason to persecute me and millions of Canadians over this.

I will be marketing this safe medicine for ever and the government will just have to deal with making the rules under which I can do so legally.

They can do nothing else. I have that right from the fact I am a living entity which is born with the right to ingest anything it wishes as a natural right, as does every other living entity on this planet. That's the way it is believe it or not. Like breathing. If i don't in any way infringe on someone else's space as a law abiding citizen the government cannot try to control the altered states I wish to achieve, especially at the cost to our society which we see all around us.

That's the primal bargain in a free society, the basis for all common law;



THAT IS THE FOUNDATION OF A FREE CIVILIZATION AND I demand it in Canada, in the year 2008

Posted by: budoracle | 2008-09-27 11:33:06 PM

On the other hand, Budo, look at you now. Your writing paints a picture of a man barely discernible from a paranoid schizophrenic.

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-09-27 11:34:21 PM

that was very well written budoracle. i know many people like you and cant find any reason to feel afraid. you sound like a wounderful and thoughtful person. great job and good luck.

Posted by: krista zoobkoff | 2008-09-27 11:40:22 PM

Shane...go find an old DeLorean...build a time machine....set it for Salem 1692... and have fun...lol


Posted by: Kim | 2008-09-28 8:22:56 AM

I'd give up my life for freedom, and thats what this is about Shane.
I shouldn't need to give up my freedoms to survive. Too many people have died fighting for my freedoms for me too just roll over and allow you to trample them.

No those studies are not new findings. I can post up similar studies dating back to the 1970's.

But I'm done with you anyway, I agree with kim go join your brethren in Salem

Posted by: Toby | 2008-09-28 8:44:38 AM

is there any way we can arrange to have all Budoracles uppercase visions sandblasted into a more enduring media than a webpage? this guy deserves a monument-
sort of like a tomb of the unknown stoner-

Posted by: 419 | 2008-09-28 9:15:43 AM


1. We don’t make policy, and certainly don’t prescribe medicine, by guesswork. “Maybe” is not good enough.

2. To judge from your writing, there’s been a price to pay in terms of cognitive ability. I thought you only bought illegal dope to ease your mother’s pain?

3. There are a great many things you will never understand, Budo, likely from decades of pickling your higher brain centres in everything from LSD to gasoline. You know maybe, just maybe, there’s a reason society doesn’t want you doing drugs that has nothing to do with corporate conspiracies?

4. You sound just like drunkards who claim they’re more careful behind the wheel after a few drinks. You’re reckless and immature and cannot be trusted with anything of importance. As a leader of men you will have more than your own life to consider.

5. Sure, after pre-screening the potentially disagreeable ones away with your “Bud Hat.” Being personable doesn’t make you a statesman. And you already pay lots of money to a criminal tyranny for more ruthless than anything Harper runs.

6. Yes, refrigerators are wonderful things, aren’t they?

7. You made a criminal of yourself, Budo. Buying controlled substances from criminals, driving stoned, and that’s just what you admit to. And as for Jonestown, wasn’t part of the problem that they were on drugs?

8. Who cares what you like? When are you going to get over the fact that this is not about you? That’s the trouble with pot users—the pot users themselves. Even without their habit they’d be selfish, narcissistic, classic cases of arrested development.

9. You would not accept anything as a valid reason, so this statement is meaningless.

10. You’ll be marketing it until your death, likely within two decades. That’s hardly forever. The wheels of time do not turn upon your word.

11. As a living entity, by Nature’s viewpoint, you have the right to devour alive, and be devoured alive. Everything else comes from the laws of Man, and you have only one vote in deciding those.

12., 13. If I can smell your dope, you’re in my space.

14. “Unconstrained” power? And all this time I thought the Charter limited the government’s power.

15. That’s one vote.

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-09-28 9:53:34 AM

Kim wrote: "Shane...go find an old DeLorean...build a time machine....set it for Salem 1692... and have fun...lol"

Why? Was there an ancestor you wanted saved?

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-09-28 9:55:47 AM

Toby, if the right to smoke pot that’s been floated to you across a lake of blood is the best example you can provide of the concept of freedom, then you DO deserve to die. I’m unaware of a single person who has been executed or died in combat to preserve your right to get stoned. Your last post was shockingly juvenile and showed total unconcern for anything but your own pleasure. You don’t care about the benefits legalizing marijuana would supposedly bring. You don’t care about the crime it causes. All you care about is you, and your right to get high. The gallows would be a good place for you.

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-09-28 10:00:37 AM

419, that's very kind and of you and way ahead of its time. Yes, sometime in the future a much more enlightened leadership will most likely, erect something like "A monument for the unknown stoner"

When I think of the hundreds of thousands of sensitive, normal, non criminal fun loving adults who have been tormented on the behalf of the likes of morons like you and your myopic idiocy, I will also be demanding an apology, but in Parliament as the Chinese got.

It took almost 100 hundred years but the the evil wrong was righted and so will this be, now.

I have no more patience with Harper and his oppression happy government, murdering storm troopers. The same rights as other Canadians to go forth and mind my own business, no matter what hateful godsuckers like you think, belong to me too.

Wait and see one digit of short sanity, 419.

Posted by: budoracle | 2008-09-28 10:03:40 AM

And you would make the perfect executioner shane, A typical conservative full of hate, anger, and a complete lack of compassion. So why don't you do it then shane? Come on kill me for using a plant.

Posted by: Toby | 2008-09-28 10:22:13 AM

But you are criminals, Budoracle, having broken the laws of the day for no better reason than wanting to chase oblivion. Since no one except a few medical patients NEEDS to smoke marijuana (and exemptions are granted for those), you can't claim discrimination, because this is entirely under your control, not a condition of birth, it is a personal choice to break the law and subsidize organized crime. A victim you're not. But you do make them.

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-09-28 10:24:04 AM

Toby, you're reeling off epithets right and left, and I'm the one filled with hate?

You're incandescent with rage, screeching hellfire and damnation and your determination to toke, toke, toke though the world come down about your ears, and I'm the one filled with anger?

You're the one feeding organized crime and responsible for, among other things, the sextuple homicide in Surrey, including two innocent bystanders, for no better reason than your self-styled right to get smeared, and I'm the one lacking in compassion?

If the law allowed it I'd do it in an instant. But unlike you, I'm no criminal.

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-09-28 10:28:50 AM

P.S. And I'm not talking about smoking weed.

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-09-28 10:31:15 AM

If the idiocy of you calling my desiring a free society unburdened by violent crime for my grand children, where people respect each other instead of denigrate and oppress is called "chasing oblivion," then yes, I am guilty of that, Shane Deflecto Mathews.(I'm kind of thinking that someone with brains might be behind that name, because it is spouting continuous obviously discredited hogwash. This really has done the anti prohibition side a large favor bringing out so much excellent rhetoric on behalf of sanity in response to your mindless endless drivel. Thanks for the inspiration--good strategy!)

See everyone at the writers festival today, near the CBC building/library today. Have a good one!

Posted by: budoracle | 2008-09-28 11:28:39 AM

Budo wrote: "If the idiocy of you calling my desiring a free society unburdened by violent crime for my grand children, where people respect each other instead of denigrate and oppress is called "chasing oblivion," then yes, I am guilty of that, Shane Deflecto Mathews."

I was referring to your lifelong drug habits, of course. And you and other tokers have the power to stop the crime right now--by not buying weed. You choose to buy the weed rather than obliterate the crime, calling on others to do the work for you. What's that say about you, he-who-gets-his-political-ideas-by-riding-thermals?

Budo wrote: "I'm kind of thinking that someone with brains might be behind that name, because it is spouting continuous obviously discredited hogwash."

Your calling it hogwash doesn't make it so. I keep telling you, it's not all about you. You'll go to your grave thinking it is, of course.

Budo wrote: "This really has done the anti prohibition side a large favor bringing out so much excellent rhetoric on behalf of sanity in response to your mindless endless drivel. Thanks for the inspiration--good strategy!"

Another common activist tactic--paint your opponents as insane. You are different, of course. I've debating dozens of people on the pros/cons of marijuana, but you are the only one I thought was sincerely mentally ill. Huffing GAS? Come on! Who's stupid enough to do that?

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-09-28 12:10:00 PM

Re...Salem witch hunt.Sticks and stones etc.
I know you are but what am I, blah blah... :P
Apparently freedom is just wonderful if it is YOUR brand of freedom...right Shane.
Freedom is great as long as it right wing knot head, do as we say, freedom..lol.
Lets try democracy... a referendum.
All those in favour of reducing penalties on this herbal remedy...say aye. Against say nay nay...lol
What I do know Shane is that your ignorance is your gateway to your own stupidity.
Ok... now its time for you to spin that backwards in my face....lol
(Shane says...look who's talking :P)
I've smoked the stuff off and on for 40 years...
Ive held down a 6 figure engineering job for 30 years...
I run 20 miles a day...
I write music, essays.... tech reports...play three instruments and have a prescription from my Doctor for my smoke.
You may have been brainwashed into believing in refer madness.
This is a medicine that is NOT ok for everyone.
It is also a medicine that works great for many.
I've seen people who cant handle pot... it tips the mental balance in some people.
As with any drug...it should be regulated...prescribed and given only to those who can tolerate it psychologically and physically. Some simply should not use it.
This is a common sense issue. Not a conservative
vs liberal issue. Many prescribed drugs should not be used by certain individuals...yet the same drugs are life savers for others.
Cannabis is no different... It simply has been demonized.
If Aspirin were to be discovered now is would be olutlawed due to the chance of excess bleeding...or overdose...
This shane guy is just having his jollies... lives for the argument.

Potato...pat(aw)to... tomato...to(maw)...

To shane Black is simply White... unless of course you agree with him.


Posted by: Kim May | 2008-09-28 2:44:08 PM

hey kim. you sound very inspiring. i agree with what you have written except for the regulation part. if some simply shouldnt use it, then they have the right to make that decision.

Posted by: krista zoobkoff | 2008-09-28 2:49:22 PM

No... I have been witness to people who should never have used it. It definitely needs regulation of some kind. People proned to paranoia should never use cannabis.
This is not a cjhoice issue for some people.
It is a choice issue for most people.
A small percentage of people cannot tolerate THC.
It sends them over a wacky edge...they can lose control of thought patterns... etc.

Posted by: kim | 2008-09-28 3:01:02 PM

people break down dopamine differently. i get it. my argument is based on principle. diabetics should not consume too much sugar. should we have a regulatory body to stop these people? what do you think about that. they face blindness, amputation, neuropathy. i agree they shouldnt use too much sugar, but i dont think we should start trying to police their bodies.

Posted by: krista zoobkoff | 2008-09-28 3:14:22 PM

"9. No, for the reasons I list above. But if alcohol were illegal I wouldn’t break the law to buy some"

That's the whole problem with your rhetoric, Shane. Where laws do not recognize human quality-of-living it is a citizen's responsibility to act to have them changed. There are about 4% of people who'd suffer from paranoid psychosis, if toking regularly. This is less than alcoholism, gambling addiciton and cigarette disease rates.
Substances that don't initiate a psychotropic effect (heroin and crack do); S.Harper and organized crime monopolies have no right telling me I can't consume them safely. Here, Conservatives are missing out on a billion dollars of tax revenue annually, and $400 million annual savings to already streched prison/police/court resources.

Posted by: Phillip Huggan | 2008-09-28 4:03:59 PM

Great day hobnobbing with the literatzi at the writers festival.

Had a ball handing out campaign literature and engaged in laughter with other intelligent creative people. Many promised to vote for me before they even accessed my writings.

I was giving quick pitch to an intelligent man who seemed intent on listening and when I turned around there was Wendy Mesli standing in a small group right behind me. Couldn't have missed a word of my spiel, because of the strength of my voice. That would be the cat's meow to get on one of my favorite CBC radio shows.

It is a real pleasure to interact with open minded people. Thank to all who listened to my stand on prohibition. There were no dissenting voices to the my song of repeal.

Harper, or any government, does not have the right to enforce this law against the Canadian people's wishes. A majority of Canadians don't want it!

Posted by: budoracle | 2008-09-28 4:31:39 PM

If not regulation...there should at least be warnings like the cool prescription drug warnings seen on tv. This drug may give you a boner...but hey if you dont want a 4 hour boner then dont take too much.
Please be aware that smoking pot chronically could lead to permanent couch lock....lol
There should be a warning to those suseptable to or expriencing psychological problems.
Another warning stating...moderate use is recommended.
you get the picture.
If legalized...people who know no better need warnings. This is not a good substance for addictive personalities. It tends to lead to doiung nothing...24/7 if not used sensibly.
It tends to lead to the fridge way too much so warnings are required to stock up on celery...not chips.
Alcohol is legal... and it has legally killed far more people than illegal pot ever has...
It would be a far better world if pot was legal and alcohol was not.


Posted by: kim | 2008-09-28 5:02:40 PM

you are absolutly right kim.

Posted by: krista zoobkoff | 2008-09-28 5:59:21 PM

Really, smoking pot could lead to permanent couch lock?

Kim you sound like you wish to make everyones choice for them and think that the government on your behalf should warn everyone about every little thing. There are a lot of things that can lead to couch lock include the consumption of fast foods.



We came from billions of years of hard evolution without the government being responsible for everyones safety in the minutest detail, and now in the information age we need to be coddle to the nth degree by the government?

Give it a break. Outlaw the burning of fossil fuel, stick warning labels on every liter of gasoline.

The trick is not to rely on government decrees because they will be lying to you.

There is no harm in pot to any greater degree than any other food product. I'm tired of the lies, pasted on "liberal" lies.

Caffeine drinks give you more of a jag. Why is there always a genre of people who must be concerned for others to the point that they need to control their behavior. Don't like garlic don't eat it, don't like pot don't smoke it and get off my back with your BS and do good concern. Please.

Any friggin vector to control others is not on. If pot were this dangerous we would see evidence of it in the nearly half century it has been heavily used by Canadians. Nowhere is a record of ill effects visible. You are dealing with fantasy thrown up by psychologists in an attempt to kow tow to the Government.

There is no record of any increase in traffic accidents and yet the moron cops bought into the propaganda from MADD. Purveyors of nonsense is what you are.

If you have bad effects from eating chocolate, these same idiots would want to criminalize the eating of chocolate, or at least hang a danger label on it.

How stupid do you wish to paint the average human, Kim, so that you have to decide everything for them?

Posted by: budoracle | 2008-09-28 6:11:22 PM

budoracle you are right. i think kims heart is in the right place and people are just getting used to the idea of legalization without regulation or taxation. kim seems very smart and i am sure that she may come to accept these ideas if we allow her to digest them. i couldnt have written this better budoracle. i cant drink coffee due to its effects, im overweight, so i dont drink coffee and am starting to excercise and eat better. i accept full responsibility for my decisions and dont need a government to hold my hand. hand holding doesnt work anyway.

Posted by: krista zoobkoff | 2008-09-28 6:27:32 PM

budoracle, did you say you were running as an independant or libertarian?

Posted by: krista zoobkoff | 2008-09-28 6:31:10 PM

"... I will also be demanding an apology, but in Parliament as the Chinese got..." ..........doth sayeth Budoracle

The Chinese in Canada built the railroad amonfst other things and became prosperous hardworking sane and sober family oriented citizens of Canada_ // you are a windy old wipehead with a funny hat waiting for your courtdate to resolve a drug trafficking charge.. and if I am not mistaken, because you offered a controlled substance to Vancouver police officers in uniform..but maybe you were set up,entrapped, hard to tell;.

don;t stay up late waiting for your Parlimentary apology- you are about to pay your own version of a ":head tax" aka: " a fine"

Posted by: 419 | 2008-09-28 6:34:10 PM

egalize it and post warnings... it simple. Its humane... whats the problem? You MUST warn the naive..the vulnerable....the suseptalbe.
Free choice is wonderful...but have a heart. You cant keep the ignorant in the dark...you have to inform people. that does not affect free choice it only offers knowledge. Read it or dont. It has nothing to do with government and everything to do with practicality.

Posted by: kim | 2008-09-28 6:37:33 PM

Kim, I'm a libertarian in my heart but independent in my political affiliation. I think Political parties are the reason there is no democracy in Canada, today. Parties in my opinion are a tool of power that denies the individual citizen his full rights to be represented.

They dilute both the effectiveness of grassroots movement, and the power of governments to affect change on behalf of the citizens. They are a product of our form of government which was conceived when the Birch bark canoe was the fastest means of communicating.

The fact is that this form of government we have has spawned these parties to deny any vestige of democracy to Canadians.

Posted by: budoracle | 2008-09-28 6:45:08 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.