The Shotgun Blog
Monday, June 22, 2009
Marc Emery: Senate stalls passage of mandatory minimum sentencing legislation
Conservative Justice Minister Rob Nicholson held a press conference today to protest the slow pace of the passage his so-called 'law and order' agenda in the Senate. Nicholson specifically cited Bill C-15, which proposes mandatory jail terms for growing even a few marijuana plants, and implored the Senate to pass the bill in less than 24 hours.
“The Conservative Party wants to appear tough on crime, but is in reality attacking young people, throwing them in jail...” said Marc Emery, leader of the B.C. Marijuana Party. “Stephen Harper is ignoring the more than 50 per cent of Canadians who support marijuana legalization at his peril. Canadians do not support this radical conservative agenda.”
Emery has been under an extradition order since 2004 when U.S. authorities, assisted by the Vancouver Police, arrested Emery on charges of marijuana seed distribution. In May, Emery announced he would be pleading guilty in order to secure a deal which would see him face 5 years in a U.S. jail.
“For Rob Nicholson to attempt to push through a bill he could not produce a single piece of evidence to support is absurd”, continued Emery. “The Conservative Party may take its cues from the Republicans, but thankfully, the Senate does not.”
(Picture: Marc Emery)
Posted by Matthew Johnston
Posted by westernstandard on June 22, 2009 | Permalink
As usual, Emery is full of shit. Canadians support decriminalization, not legalization. In any case, it's almost impossible to be locked up for even repeated incidents of simple possession, as Emery himself has so grandiosely demonstrated, so his sob story about young people being thrown in the slammer with gang-bangers and serial rapists just doesn't hold water.
Of course, in the whacky world of Canadian politics, he may yet find himself with an Order of Canada. In a country where abortionists can get the O of C just for being abortionists, anything is possible. That's always been a truism of Canadian politics and history--hold up your head high enough, and someone will blow it off. Lose your head, and eventually someone will pick it up. We haven't been our own country since Trudeau took power in 1968.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-06-22 11:27:51 PM
"In any case, it's almost impossible to be locked up for even repeated incidents of simple possession, as Emery himself has so grandiosely demonstrated, so his sob story about young people being thrown in the slammer with gang-bangers and serial rapists just doesn't hold water."
Isn't that what Bill C-15 changes?
Posted by: Matthew Johnston | 2009-06-23 1:19:50 AM
Yes, this scumbag of a politician needs to be thrown in the slammer for a few hours to know the difference between a violent anal penetration and a gram of pot...
I think if he did that he might actually legalize it.
Posted by: Johnston Matthewettes shane | 2009-06-23 5:20:04 AM
Emery is a drug dealer who deserves the death penalty - that should be his minimum sentence.
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2009-06-23 5:29:45 AM
"Isn't that what Bill C-15 changes?"
My understanding is that it de-emphasizes the penalties for simple possession while increasing minimum penalties for growers, pushers, and smugglers. Emery, of course, belongs to the latter category.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-06-23 6:07:52 AM
Are you offering to do the penetrating, Matthewettes? Or were you just hoping to film the encounter for your Facebook page?
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-06-23 6:09:12 AM
Now if only Nicholson could pay "rapid" attention to the CHRC Section 13 and the Lynchettes...!
Posted by: The LS from Sk | 2009-06-23 6:17:04 AM
The senate should do its job and ensure that this terrible bill NEVER becomes law. I wrote letters to most of the senators asking them not to pass this trash. Too bad there wasn't a minimum death penalty sentence for being an ignorant fuckin douchebag like zeb.
The senate that wrote the senate committee report on the non-medicinal use of drugs, should know better than to pass this harmful legislation. Conservative senator Nolin knows better for sure.
Posted by: DrGreenthumb | 2009-06-23 7:26:57 AM
Yup, every few weeks... like clockwork...
Posted by: Richard Evans | 2009-06-23 7:44:37 AM
"As usual, Emery is full of shit. Canadians support decriminalization, not legalization."
No, Shane, Emery is right: a majority of Canadians support *legalization*. You might be relying on older statistics, like these ones: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01.n923.a01.html
More recent polling shows that support for legalization has become the majority view: http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/16300
Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 2009-06-23 8:00:54 AM
From 2007 (two polls) through 2008 (one poll): http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/30688/canadian_majority_would_legalize_marijuana/
Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 2009-06-23 8:02:46 AM
The only thing C-15 will accomplish is scaring Canadians into buying their marijuana from drug dealers thus supporting organized crime. It's time for Canadians to act to remove the criminality of such benign behaviour and concentrate on violent crimes.
Posted by: Simple Logic | 2009-06-23 8:17:42 AM
"The senate should do its job and ensure that this terrible bill NEVER becomes law. I wrote letters to most of the senators asking them not to pass this trash. Too bad there wasn't a minimum death penalty sentence for being an ignorant fuckin douchebag like zeb."
If you had any brain cells left unsmoked, Poison Pill, you'd know that "minimum death penalty" is absurd logic. Death is death. You're light-hearted and happy, though, you bet.
"The senate that wrote the senate committee report on the non-medicinal use of drugs, should know better than to pass this harmful legislation. Conservative senator Nolin knows better for sure."
You mean the Senate that consists of fashion designers, CBC apparatchiks, and maybe a draft dodger or two?
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-06-23 9:04:32 AM
Unfortunately, P.M., that same link also says that 91% of Canadians support keeping five other drugs illegal, drugs that have been strongly linked to prior marijuana use. 43% say that Canada has a serious drug abuse problem; 86% support DARE-style education programs to discourage Canadians from using drugs; and 71% support mandatory minimum sentences for growers and dealers (and therefore support the legislation in question).
These numbers demonstrate that the "majority" have not given the issue serious thought, as these numbers make no logical sense. The legalization statistic, in particular, is doubtless driven by those who smoked marijuana in their youth, a rather large cohort, given that we're talking about baby boomers.
In any case, I expect a majority of Canadians would opt out of paying taxes or speeding tickets, too, if they could. That doesn't make it good policy.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-06-23 9:11:12 AM
"The only thing C-15 will accomplish is scaring Canadians into buying their marijuana from drug dealers thus supporting organized crime."
People can be scared into buying from criminals when the alternative of not buying at all is also available? What kind of person supports murder and mayhem in the streets for a completely empty and useless high? If many Canadians are prepared to do just that, perhaps they'd better give themselves a long look in the mirror.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-06-23 9:12:56 AM
Who has $20 that the Senate will/ will not just look i this piece of legislation over- and pass the Mandy Mins with nothing more than a few dot shifts--maybe add a few lines addressing details of rehabilitation.. such as: vocational training, or clearing brush in the Northern part of whatever province their drug crime takes place-( beautiful BC takes on an entirely different meaning )
- - or perhaps the Senate is evaluating some sort of ankle bracelet/web cam GPS for drug felons that broadcasts directly to the Justice Ministers ' laptop screen- you know something made in Canada
If the Senate starts getting soft of drug crime, and last time we looked they did not care much for legalization of controlled substances-- they might as well stay home and answer emails from kids about their homework
Posted by: 419 | 2009-06-23 9:28:29 AM
"...The senate should do its job and ensure that this terrible bill NEVER becomes law. I wrote letters to most of the senators asking them not to pass this trash. Too bad there wasn't a minimum death penalty sentence for being an ignorant fuckin douchebag like zeb..." doth say Dr Greenthumb
We would LOVE to see those letters, they would be hilarious.
Dear Honourable Douchebags of the Senate
please execute the following ignorant fucking people
( thirty page list attachment )
also: see: jpegs of recent all ages ping pong tournament
" Hit Back Hard with 420 Paddles for Drug freedom "
" its all the prohibitionists fault "
we now carry this popular slogan as truck bumper stickers, monogrammed ashtrays. combo bong/ ammo clips fobs
collectors series HPS lightbulbs to brighten your basement
Posted by: 419 | 2009-06-23 9:41:52 AM
Shane: You said Emery was lying, and that a majority of Canadians do not support legalization. The polls that I linked demonstrate that the majority of Canadians support marijuana *legalization*. Emery was therefore not lying, and you were therefore wrong on that point.
Whether or not marijuana is a "gateway drug," whether or not Canadians have or have not thought hard about it, whether or not Canadians support DARE-style "education" campaigns, whether or not Canadians don't support legalization for other drugs, and so on, is a separate issue from the issue about whether or not a majority of Canadians support marijuana legalization. And a majority of Canadians *do* support marijuana legalization.
Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 2009-06-23 9:43:58 AM
"...“For Rob Nicholson to attempt to push through a bill he could not produce a single piece of evidence to support is absurd”, continued Emery. “The Conservative Party may take its cues from the Republicans, but thankfully, the Senate does not....”
We saw that clip where NDP Vancouver slum goddess Libby somebody demanded the Justice Minister provide her proof the mandy min legislation would be acceptable to her.
Take a hike there NDP third stringer bit players - he does';t have to prove _anything_ to you or your druggie neighbors- all he has to do is announce legislation and he did.
.Canadians voted Rt Hon Nicholsons' party into office so they would do things, not explain to the losers why .
BTW Nor does the Justice Minister have to explain to the Prince of Pot why he is being sent to America in chains..just say yes or no His majesty never explained to the Justice Minister why he sold $15,000,000.00 worth of pot seeds & hid $11,000,000.00
Smarten up or Dr Greenthumb will write a postcard to her Royal Douchebagness -the Queen
Posted by: 419 | 2009-06-23 9:59:01 AM
"Whether or not marijuana is a "gateway drug," whether or not Canadians have or have not thought hard about it, whether or not Canadians support DARE-style "education" campaigns, whether or not Canadians don't support legalization for other drugs, and so on, is a separate issue from the issue about whether or not a majority of Canadians support marijuana legalization."
Unfortunately, P.M., those issues cannot be separated at the policy level, and you know it well. Much confusion also exists as to the difference between decriminalization (fines instead of jail, which is de facto what we have already), or legalization (can buy it at the corner store next to the high school). So many of those Canadians might in fact support decrim only. Furthermore, this is only a single poll; it contradicts many previous ones I've seen; the majority it affords is razor-thin. So claiming victory on this point is premature.
In any case, even if all those concerned WERE to be addressed at some future date, perhaps you or Emery can enlighten me on the wisdom of crafting policy based on uninformed opinion?
I detect stubbornness. And perhaps some bitterness as well.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-06-23 10:29:36 AM
anybody want to bet $20 on whether this is stubborness or bitterness ?
Posted by: 419 | 2009-06-23 10:47:38 AM
"If many Canadians are prepared to do just that, perhaps they'd better give themselves a long look in the mirror."
But that's just the point. Many people obviously are prepared to do that regardless of penalties. The drug laws you advocate don't work in the real world precisely because you are basing your reasoning on what people should be doing on not on what they are doing (you will hear the same arguments from marxists when it comes to economics).
As it stands, the policies you are supporting are responsible for a lot of unnecessary violence.
Posted by: Charles | 2009-06-23 10:51:16 AM
I have an idea: let's torture Emery. None of that weakling water boarding stuff, I mean real, genuine, UN resolution violating torture.
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2009-06-23 10:52:32 AM
Shane: You said Marc Emery lied, that a majority of Canadians did not support legalization. I pointed to several polls demonstrating that Marc Emery did not lie, that a majority of Canadians do support marijuana legalization.
All the rest is a different subject matter. We can get into a debate about the merits of polling people, about whether or not Canadians are sufficiently informed, about whether or not marijuana is a gateway drug, etc. But you claimed that Emery lied, that a majority of Canadians did not support marijuana legalization. It turns out that Emery was right, and that a majority (however slim) of Canadians do support marijuana legalization.
This has nothing to do with emotions or feelings, this has to do with the facts about whether or not Marc Emery lied when he said that a majority of Canadians support marijuana legalization. The facts are clear: A majority of Canadians do support marijuana legalization. Marc Emery did not lie. You were wrong on that point.
Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 2009-06-23 10:55:10 AM
"But that's just the point. Many people obviously are prepared to do that regardless of penalties. The drug laws you advocate don't work in the real world precisely because you are basing your reasoning on what people should be doing on not on what they are doing (you will hear the same arguments from marxists when it comes to economics)."
If laws reflected only what people are doing rather than what they should be doing, Charles, there would be no need for laws. Every argument you make about the illegality of marijuana attracting criminals, you can make about every other criminal enterprise.
And let's be frank here: Do you really believe that the same or nearly the same number of Canadians would smoke marijuana if the penalty were death, or a lengthy prison term? Would they be smoking it openly in parks or condominiums where everyone could see them? Likely not. The issue is not, therefore, whether punishment works, but whether the *current* punishments work.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-06-23 11:10:28 AM
"...As it stands, the policies you are supporting are responsible for a lot of unnecessary violence..." doth say Charles
We are in favour of all necessary violence,
anything but surrender to a future world of Doptopia values.
Spray the swamps now before mosquito season kicks in..
"...because you are basing your reasoning on what people should be doing on not on what they are doing..."
is there a better basis for reasoning than reaching a goal
and not putting up with crap - especially crap from wipeheads ??
Posted by: 419 | 2009-06-23 11:16:35 AM
Of course, the other alternative to winding down the Drug War and a rapid social deployment of lesser penalties - would be for the wipeheads to quit using, buying, selling, transporting, smuggling or manufacture of these drugs that are fueling the conflict,
If Wipeheads won't give up their wipe and instead, are perfectly willing to endure every escalating penalty imposed upon them by their fellows for their unaccepotable choices -- well so be it.. Escalating penalties it is- that worked for DUI and many other offenses of selfishness that endangers others.
Posted by: 419 | 2009-06-23 11:25:55 AM
"Shane: You said Marc Emery lied, that a majority of Canadians did not support legalization. I pointed to several polls demonstrating that Marc Emery did not lie, that a majority of Canadians do support marijuana legalization."
You pointed to three polls from the same pollster over an 11-month period, the most recent of which was a year a ago, and two of which, including the most recent, were majorities by less than the margin of error (3.1 percent). Until these results are confirmed by other pollsters, to declare the point settled is premature. If you had an averaged 60-percent majority confirmed by several pollsters, you'd have a clear basis for making such an absolute and declamatory statement. At the moment you don't.
"This has nothing to do with emotions or feelings, this has to do with the facts about whether or not Marc Emery lied when he said that a majority of Canadians support marijuana legalization."
Now you are the one who lies. Emotion has everything to do with it. I recognize the mulishness, the terseness, the combativeness in your writing; I have seen it before. The obsessive, quarrelsome way you focus like a laser on a minor point, determined to have this one victory, however tiny, at any cost, because it would likely be your last for a while. Pity you couldn't quite manage it, but then, as this entire thread proves, you've backed duds before.
It wouldn't be because one of your idols will be in an American penitentiary before the summer is out, would it? Well ask yourself this: Who has he to blame but himself for ending up in there? He slammed every door and burned every bridge; now only one route yet lies open, his only remaining option to beg the gatekeeper on bended knee to reduce the toll.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-06-23 11:28:49 AM
"anybody want to bet $20 on whether this is stubborness or bitterness ?"
I call both. I could use an extra $40.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-06-23 11:29:23 AM
The Canadian public now understand and appreciate that to come home after a hard days' work, read a good book, have a glass of ice tea and smoke a joint is not a crime spree.
Posted by: Roy B. | 2009-06-23 11:42:14 AM
Having read the legislation in question, I know for a fact that it's a red herring to argue that most users are in danger of manditory minimums. Clearly the legislation is directed at people who make their livlihood through marihuana sales.
If we are going to keep marihuana prohibition on the the books, we should ensure that the deterrent is realistic. Most people tempted by the prospect of the money are not deterred by the prospect of a few weeks in jail. Career criminals least of all.
The gateway theory, again thrown out here, does make sense in this context. If we are ensuring that career criminals are the ones who are selling the dope, the millions of Canadians who buy it will be exposed to the gamut of their wares.
It's not just a matter of being offered drugs though. The point is that there is a cultural problem around marijuana use. Until advocates of legalization come to terms with this fact, they are ultimately not going to be able to overcome the sort of objections Shane Matthews raises. Ultimately, our bad laws can only excacerbate the problems created by bad individual choices.
Posted by: Timothy | 2009-06-23 12:02:36 PM
Shane: The titles of the polls read "majority supports legalization." If you have a beef with calling it a majority, take it up with the pollster. Marc Emery did not lie. He reported what the pollster reported.
So, to summarize, Emery did not lie. A majority of Canadians do support legalization. You were wrong on that point. All the rest is a separate issue.
Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 2009-06-23 12:37:09 PM
"Shane: The titles of the polls read "majority supports legalization."
The pollster also put fine print on them which makes it clear that two of the three samplings were only majorities within the margin of error. So in spite of the title, they're not really sure, nor are we. This information is also more than a year old. Did Emery repeat any of this additional information in his own claim?
A lie of omission is still a lie, P.M. It wouldn't be the first time Emery's massaged the truth for his own purposes; I don't expect it will be the last. Nor do you, probably.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-06-23 1:09:11 PM
Give it up, P.M. You're not going to win this one. Not unless you can a) find other polls immediately predating the remarks by Emery that confirm the Angus-Ried polls BEYOND THE MARGIN OF ERROR; b) prove that these polls really do accurately reflect Canadians' attitudes towards LEGALIZATION and not DECRIMINALIZATION (respondents misunderstand the question, and sometimes lie); and c) prove that Emery knew of them when he said it. To utter a statement that one believes is untrue but turns out to be in fact true is still a lie in deed, if not in fact.
You'd think being honest was really hard, to look at all this analysis. But that's just because so many people are so creative at finding ways around the truth.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-06-23 1:15:15 PM
The person who accuses someone of wrongdoing carries the burden of proof. In this case, that's you.
You accused Emery of lying, then provided no evidence to suggest that he was, in fact, lying. I've provided sufficient evidence to suggest that you are wrong, and that Emery did not lie. You haven't provided anything apart from your firm feelings that Emery lied.
Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 2009-06-23 1:20:11 PM
"The person who accuses someone of wrongdoing carries the burden of proof. In this case, that's you."
The person who would use data to back his claim had best see that his data are in order. You didn't. Those data are not conclusive nor, if they were, necessarily accurate. As any politician knows, the only way to know for sure is to put the question to a legal, binding vote. Especially with numbers that close.
Both you and Emery presented as established fact something that nobody really knows. That's lying, my friend.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-06-23 1:40:47 PM
"All the rest is a separate issue." The age-old cry of the end-around artist.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-06-23 1:44:38 PM
The poll is titled "majority supports marijuana legalization." In all the polls, majorities did, in fact, say that they supported legalization. Case closed.
Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 2009-06-23 1:52:59 PM
Those who support the "War on (Some) Drugs" fall into one of four categories:
1. The uninformed (many in this forum obviously fall into this category*)
2. The just plain stupid (again, many in this forum),
3. Those making money from the illegality of drugs, and,
4. Politicians (which is really just the "all of the above" answer).
*If you don't think you fall into this category, then let me ask you what the LD50 is for Cannabis and what implications that has for policy around this plant.
Posted by: Dan Givens | 2009-06-23 1:57:26 PM
I applaud the Canadian senate for holding up this "do nothing" ideologically based bill. I have been following it very closely and have read the Canadian Senate 2002 report on Cannabis that recommends decriminalization after having reviewed very extensively both sides of the issue. I have also corresponded with the Senate members and have received promising, common sense evidence based responses.
I am a successful 43 year old family man who smokes marijuana both recreationally, medicinally and will continue to so as long as I live. I have and claim the right as a free human being.
Watch a documentary called "The Union" http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-9077214414651731007&hl=en
to learn facts about the marijuana/hemp industry.
PS - Shane Matthews and 419 are ignorant morons looking for attention. These types are a part of the Harper gov't base supporters. Just ignore it. LOL!
Posted by: Tony_42 | 2009-06-23 1:58:05 PM
So long as the US keeps drugs illegal, Canada will do the same. God Bless America for keeping things the way they should be.
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2009-06-23 2:20:44 PM
Strange days? Mexico is legalizing possession of marijuana, cocaine, amphetamine and heroin for personal use (small qtys) - whilst the United States is in the process of exploring legalization and regulation of cannabis, and Canada wants to make it a crime.
The world is upside down, if drug laws worked, the U.S. would be a crowning success, the obvious failure of such drug laws in the U.S. should make it plain that criminalizing marijuana use, is stupid, foolish, a waste of money, and it won't work and will polarize Canadian society and citizens.
Adults should be allowed to do as they like with their own bodies, as long as it doesn't hurt others. Cannabis use is harmless and should be regulated soley to guarantee purity and provide a mechanism of licensing which would limit sellers from selling to children or underage consumers.
Gasoline is more harmful than cannabis, but I can buy it by the gallon without an age check. I can burn down a house with gasoline, but all I get is sleepy if I smoke cannabis. Whats wrong with the Canadian intellect? Has American stupidity permeated the border and infiltrated its northern neighbor?
Posted by: Strange Days | 2009-06-23 2:25:27 PM
"The poll is titled "majority supports marijuana legalization."
Well, if the pollster put a TITLE on it...What was I thinking?
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-06-23 2:26:31 PM
Those who oppose the "war on drugs" fall into two categories:
1. Criminals; and
2. Their enablers and sympathizers.
P.S. Anyone know the LD50 of an icepick lobotomy? Anyone prepared to get one for chucks solely on that basis? Anyone? Anyone???
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-06-23 2:29:12 PM
Shane, based on your response to my question about the LD50, you obviously have no idea what it is and therefore fall into either category #1 or #2 above.
For those of you interested in things like facts and science, the LD50 is a type of toxicity test that determines the Lethal Dosage to 50% of test animals. The LD50 for Cannabis ranges from 1:20,000 to 1:40,000 meaning it would take 20,000-40,000 typical doses to kill 50% of test animals. Extrapolated to humans, a 150 pound man would need to consume 1,500 pounds in 15 minutes. Obviously, this would be difficult to accomplish.
NO ONE HAS EVER DIED FROM INGESTING CANNABIS! Based on this fact, you can refer to my chart above if you still support its illegality.
Posted by: Dan Givens | 2009-06-23 2:36:57 PM
NO ONE HAS EVER DIED FROM INGESTING CANNABIS!
Posted by: Dan Givens | 2009-06-23 2:36:57 PM
That remains to be seen. People have died from ingesting marijuana that has been contaminated with aspergillus fungus.
Posted by: The Stig | 2009-06-23 2:55:10 PM
"...PS - Shane Matthews and 419 are ignorant morons looking for attention. These types are a part of the Harper gov't base supporters. Just ignore it. LOL!..."
takes a stoned man to call another person a moron and then laughm esp one 43 years old.. so answer us this Tony-- why do you feel the need to use pot for fun and then as medicine- same dope, same lungs same brain/ why so different results ? ?
..at what point are you a legitimate medical user and at what point are you just another wipehead getting ripped?
While you are at it, are you a legitimate medical marijuana user, or is all this your own diagnosis and prescription ? what seems to be wrong with you that pot heals your afflictions ?
morons want to know
We understand if you don't respond, Most blowhard Wipehead apologists have no real answers, just anger wrapped responses. most of which we have all heard before .We eagerly await your enlightened reply
Posted by: 419 | 2009-06-23 2:57:06 PM
I smoke pot for fun, not for medicinal use. Anyone who doesn't like it can go f--k himself.
I don't know much about Canadians but after reading this blog I'm going to have to revise my previous assessments. Seems Canada is full of retards (Shane Matthews prominent amongst them) and idiots (a vocation Shane also excels in.)
Let me spell it out for you, dumb asses--marijuana doesn't hurt anyone. A person smoking marijuana in his own home doesn't hurt anyone. A person buying marijuana doesn't hurt anyone. A person growing marijuana WOULDN'T hurt anyone if he had to do so subject to regulations and laws.
Here's a news flash: People are not going to stop smoking marijuana just because pussies like you think they ought to. Making the penalty stronger and stronger won't work; it will only serve to decrease respect for the law and increase crime. The War on Drugs has failed and will always fail, and only idiots and retards fail to see and accept that.
P.S. "wipehead"? LMAO, that is the dumbest word I've ever heard. Figures that a Canadian would have thought of it.
Posted by: Nathan | 2009-06-23 3:28:08 PM
We here don't know if Marc Emery was lying- but we can disceren he did not do a proper job with the truth, That poll he refers to was conducted two years ago. its take information
That poll only consulted 1,028 adults over a three day period, two years ago, That is a very small sample- hardly one to be able to state this is how the majority of Canadians feel about legalizing drugs , It would be more truthful to state that the poll reflects what 1000 people felt two years ago, one high school may easily have more that 1000 students enrolled , many people on facebook have more than 1000 friends,, We are sure Mr Emery knew this but chose not to say so,
Willfull exageration to attain a deliberately distorted outcome-- is not exactly a lie, but it's close enough. The Senate wouldn't get away with quoting a tiny sample telephone poll to reach their conclusions..
Posted by: 419 | 2009-06-23 3:47:13 PM
I have yet to see a single convincing argument for legalization or decriminalization. I do, on the other hand, see great social utility in persecuting druggies and drug dealers. The world needs cheap labor in the dirtiest and noisiest jobs!
If you want to see what drugs do to people, check out Toronto these days. They have greedy unions who refuse to back down, a mayor and city council who let them strike, and a populace of people who totally failed to see that THEY were the ones responsible for each. Enjoy your stinky garbage for the next few weeks, losers.
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2009-06-23 4:00:59 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.