babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » canadian politics   » Marijuanna debated in the House today.

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Marijuanna debated in the House today.
Trinitty
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 826

posted 07 November 2001 02:01 PM      Profile for Trinitty     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Dr. Keith Martin, MP for the Canadian Alliance is introducing his Private Member's Bill today.

It would make possession of 30 grams of weed a ticketable offense rather than a criminal one.

What do you all think?


From: Europa | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Casper
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1406

posted 07 November 2001 02:11 PM      Profile for Casper        Edit/Delete Post
Makes sense to me. It is a huge contradiction in policy to allow for the public use of tobacco and alcohol which are much more harmful, but to criminalize marijuana. Also, with the spiraling health care costs and government cutbacks on services, medicinal marijuana use is a relatively inexpensive way for people to cope with pain. By the way, a study recently reported that the m.j. industry in B.C. has surpassed the forestry biz. They extimate pot is worth 6 billion a year in the province - forestry 5.6 billion
From: Another smoky metropolis | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
SHH
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1527

posted 07 November 2001 02:13 PM      Profile for SHH     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
FYI, it's been the law (<1 oz) in California for approx. 15 yrs. Oregon too I think. Arizona still treats it as a felony. And guess what? AZ, OR, and CA all have the same usage rates. Humm.
From: Ex-Silicon Valley to State Saguaro | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
JCL
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1387

posted 07 November 2001 06:39 PM      Profile for JCL     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I only support drug use like marijuana for medicinal purposes only. Anything else would be uncivilized.
From: Winnipeg. 35 days to Christmas yet no snow here. | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
clersal
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 370

posted 07 November 2001 06:48 PM      Profile for clersal     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Of course JCL what else would one use Marijuana for? Really.
From: Canton Marchand, Québec | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214

posted 07 November 2001 07:46 PM      Profile for Tommy_Paine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The government should be made to show cause for why marijuana is illegal in the first place.

By outlawing it, they seem to indicate some harm may come from using it-- more harm than from other regulated substances like alcohol or tobacco.

I think in order to maintain the law, the government should prove its case; or admit to being an enemy of liberty.


From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
nonsuch
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1402

posted 08 November 2001 02:33 AM      Profile for nonsuch     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
There never was a 'case' against marijuana - only a vilification campaign.

I don't know all the reasons why they (the US gov't, of course) decided to do this. Maybe because it's too cheap and easy to grow... i mean, people might stop buying Coke (i believe, back in the 30's, Coke still was the real thing). Or they needed a bogey-man. Or, with the lifting of prohibition, it might compete with liquor for big profit. Or the FBI needed something new to wage war on, so their budget wouldn't be cut. Probably all of the above and a couple more.

Anyway, there never was a rational reason to lump it in with heroin and bootlegged Cipro.
Decriminilazing 30 grams is a baby step. In the right direction, sure, but hardly a milestone of social enlightenment.

Think how much revenue the government has missed out on! They should have legalized, regulated (and taxed) the stuff for the last 40 years. Proof: they're making out like bandits on gambling.


From: coming and going | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 08 November 2001 03:08 AM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Absolutely correct, as usual, nonesuch.
There is a lengthy and explanation as to why marijuanna was banned here: http://www.cannabis.com/faqs/hemp2.shtml

It is worth the read. Quite enlightening.


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Sine Ziegler
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 225

posted 08 November 2001 03:12 AM      Profile for Sine Ziegler     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
We have all heard the debate around the legalization of marijuana, however I still hold the opinion that pot sucks.

I used to have cool friends who actually ENJOYED going out on the weekend. Once they got into the weed, they were no longer interested in regular social activity and were more than satisfied sitting at home smoking a bowl.

Now, I know alcohol is potentially more dangerous and socially life altering than pot, but I take the status quo on this issue. We cannot have the best or the worst of both worlds.

As for the reccomended website on hash (!!!!!!!) dare I even say how unsubstantiated that sites information is? I cannot argue against the racism that goes on in North America, but PLEASE do not believe everything that is on the internet.

Call me naive if you wish, and try to educate me otherwise.

[ November 08, 2001: Message edited by: Sine Ziegler ]


From: Calgary | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 08 November 2001 03:33 AM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You know, people abuse all sorts of things. Tha's their business. But if someone wants to enjoy a little moderate marijuanna use, why shouldn't they?

If your concern is that they might become like your friends, ban marriage and children. That tends to keep people home, as well.

quote:
As for the reccomended website on hash (!!!!!!!) dare I even say how unsubstantiated that sites information is? I cannot argue against the racism that goes on in North America, but PLEASE do not believe everything that is on the internet.


If you are referring to the web site I posted, it is actually a site pertaining to cannabis. As well, racism has long been a part of our history. We can pretend it isn't, but pretending changes nothing.

quote:

Call me naive if you wish, and try to educate me otherwise.


Why be lazy? The article provided names, circumstances and time periods, as well as, references to specific legislation. Educate yourself. You will learn more and be more grateful for having done so. Or, simply close your mind. It is your choice.

From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Victor Von Mediaboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 554

posted 08 November 2001 11:48 AM      Profile for Victor Von Mediaboy   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I used to have cool friends who actually ENJOYED going out on the weekend. Once they got into the weed, they were no longer interested in regular social activity and were more than satisfied sitting at home smoking a bowl.

Virtually the same thing happens to my friends once they get married. I think we should ban marriage.


From: A thread has merit only if I post to it. So sayeth VVMB! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Trinitty
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 826

posted 08 November 2001 11:52 AM      Profile for Trinitty     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Great, now I'm in REEEEEAAAAALLLLY big trouble. Trinitty is illegal!
From: Europa | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Victor Von Mediaboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 554

posted 08 November 2001 11:59 AM      Profile for Victor Von Mediaboy   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Trinitty is illegal


I've always suspected as much.


From: A thread has merit only if I post to it. So sayeth VVMB! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 08 November 2001 12:25 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Me too. It is hard to tell from here, but take my word for it: her eyes are shifting.
From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Sine Ziegler
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 225

posted 08 November 2001 12:30 PM      Profile for Sine Ziegler     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The kind of marijuana drug use most of you are talking about goes unharmed as it is and although still illegal, it is quite easy to get away with unless you are undergoing drug tests.

Why not let people make their own decisions? They practically do. So I can argue that it is rather redundant to legalize marijuana at this point, and then you can argue that since it is so redundant and the law does not go so far, it should be legalized anyway.

But then if you use THAT arguement, you cannot so much claim that those who wish to smoke up are being opressed and criminalized before the law.

I personally believe we are slowly moving towards legalizing marijuana anyway. Soon it will be legal to smoke a cigarette ten times more harmful to your lungs than before. (I smoke by the way) Corporations are going to get the go ahead in producing marijuana, but at least now we get to know what it contains chemically, if we care.

Should we be allowed to advertise marijuana and what do you all think will happen to the private producers? Maybe the state should produce it and we can have a crown corporation of marijuana in BC!


From: Calgary | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Trinitty
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 826

posted 08 November 2001 12:48 PM      Profile for Trinitty     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
People ARE arrested for simple possesion in this country. They are arrested for growing this plant. Someone that's smoking a joint by the river with their friends can be arrested, charged, and convicted of a CRIME. People that grow this plant in their homes are thrown in jail and their children are taken away. Millions of dollars are spent on "green teams" the cops so love to form to bust grow-ops and yes, even compassion clubs. That is wrong.

It doesn't matter if people "do it anyway", they shouldn't have to be furtive about it int he first place. That's why so many biker gangs are the mass growers in this country.... you are a criminal in Canada if you grow, posess, and ingest marijuanna, thus it's left up to the criminals to supply it for the most part.

This is wrong.


From: Europa | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Victor Von Mediaboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 554

posted 08 November 2001 12:52 PM      Profile for Victor Von Mediaboy   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
The one worry I've had about legalization is that I'm more likely to trust my local dealer than a large corporate. If the weed is legalized, how much you wanna bet a licence will be required to manufacture it, and only large corps will be able to afford to operate.

I can only support legalization if individuals are allowed to grow the stuff without too much government interference.

Today I read (in the Globe and Mail, thus I ain't even gonna TRY to link to the article) that a Canadian Senator mentioned legalizing cocaine and heroin this week.

There's also the little problem of the likelihood that the US would slam the border shut if we legalized weed, in order to prevent US dealers buying cheap weed up here and smuggling it down south.

But this has all been discussed before. Hasn't this issue been done to death on Babble?

Not that I'm complaining. I like the sound of my own typing.

[ November 08, 2001: Message edited by: Kneel before MediaBoy ]


From: A thread has merit only if I post to it. So sayeth VVMB! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Slick Willy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 184

posted 08 November 2001 01:08 PM      Profile for Slick Willy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
The one worry I've had about legalization

There is always the confusion in this aspect of this debate. There is no debate or bill or suggestion that pot should be legalized.

The difference is between legalizations and decriminalization. They are different and that should be clear. If pot is decriminalized you still get you pot taken away and you get a ticket. Even for one joint. Legalization would mean that you you are not breaking the law even if you roll up a 30 gram blunt on the steps of the court house and fire it up. You could even offer a hit to the nearest cop with out incurring the wrath of a judge.

So with decriminalization it is still illegal but considered a minor offence like parking in the wrong place or speeding or more likely J-walking.


From: Hog Heaven | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Trinitty
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 826

posted 08 November 2001 01:10 PM      Profile for Trinitty     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I totally agree with you M'boy, one would have to be allowed to grow there own, or grow for their own clientel. They wouldn't be able to grow in a rental home though due to the level of destruction it can cause if they are bad farmers. If companies got ahold of it some strains could be lost and quality and composition could be mucked around with. Sure, if you want to buy it at the liquor store, there could be companies and businesses that sell it, and that could be taxed. There would need to be a balance.

The States wouldn't slam the border shut, they need us for trade as much as we need them.


From: Europa | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Victor Von Mediaboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 554

posted 08 November 2001 01:11 PM      Profile for Victor Von Mediaboy   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
The States wouldn't slam the border shut, they need us for trade as much as we need them.


For now. It's quite possible (probable?) that US/Mexican trade will outpace US/Canada trade within a few years.


From: A thread has merit only if I post to it. So sayeth VVMB! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Trinitty
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 826

posted 08 November 2001 01:18 PM      Profile for Trinitty     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Ah yes, they can grow all of the factory farm agriculture they want... but they don't have Energy, Oil, and *gulp*, Water... and I hope they'll want our softwood lumber again soon.

The party is split on the issue, but at least Dr. Martin's bill is prompting more discussion. Hopefully the Liberals with steal it and implement it after they get the final report from committee.


From: Europa | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Slick Willy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 184

posted 08 November 2001 01:20 PM      Profile for Slick Willy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Also, it seems when ever we talk about decriminalization of pot someone wants to add Coke, smack and whatever other hard core narcotic on to the same bill. When ever this happens the bill drops to the ground like a brick. And in my opinion it should. There is a huge difference between these drugs.

Smoking and eating are the two most common ways of ingesting pot. Here is my example: if you smoked or ate a gram of pot all in one go you would get pretty buzzed and somewhat goofy, rather hungry and after a bit a little sleepy. Do the same with coke, crack or smack and you will be doa or close to it. Not to mention how much these drugs are stepped on before they even get into the hands of the user. In their purest form , say you're prayers cause Kansas is going bye bye.

I have never heard of anyone overdosing on organic pot no matter how much they've ingested. So it makes sense to decriminalize pot and free up court and prison resources.


From: Hog Heaven | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 08 November 2001 01:44 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Slick Willy, it seems we might find some common ground.

I would like to attempt an appeal to you, however, on the issue of harder drugs.

The use of heroine, cocaine and other hard drugs is fairly common. They can exact the same type of destruction on individuals and families as alcohol and gambling addiction.
But, illegal drugs are much more expensive than legal drugs. Resulting in a higher degree of petty crime. Further, there is a stigma attached to drug addiction not associated with alcoholism, although, there is a stigma there too.

The costs, social and medical, of drug abuse, of all kinds, is staggering. As well, the primary beneficiaries of the illegal drug trade are organized crime and (and I hesitate to say this as I really don't want to change the subject) terrorists and rogue states.

So, I would put forward to you, that regulating the manufacture and sale of currently illegal drugs, with proceeds flowing into health, treatment and control, would go along way to eliminating the stigma, reducing the costs of enforcement, as well as, related social costs, fiancial and personal, and take income away from those criminal organizations that currently profit from the trade.

It is not my intention to change your mind, but to offer an alternative view point.


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Debra
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 117

posted 08 November 2001 01:48 PM      Profile for Debra   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post

[ November 08, 2001: Message edited by: earthmother ]


From: The only difference between graffiti & philosophy is the word fuck... | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Slick Willy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 184

posted 08 November 2001 02:12 PM      Profile for Slick Willy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Fuck you're going to love this. heh heh

I totally agree with all that you said. But we need to take baby steps to get everyone from a to b. and should we try to create a bill that is all things to everyone, it won't happen. So change pot from a criminal act to a minor offence. Let the hardliners see that there are benefits from that act and youth hasn't gone to hell in a hand basket. Once the proof is there we have something to stand on to argue changes in the the rest of the drug arena.

I agree that to make things better for hard drug users and manage to get off adiction the best way is to take control of it, and regulate it with a managed dependance outcome. Clean needles, clean drugs, transparent availability will turn the problem into a manageable one where people come out the other end alive and functional.

But because of the ignorance and stigma attached to hard drugs, you can say what you like but all people will here is free crack and smack, a comfy place to spread AIDS and other IVTDs, and supporting criminals. Baby steps will help to remove those stigmas and provide the awarness that needs to be inplace for us to deal with the problem effectivly.
So I agree with you Wingnut. You can pick your jaw up off the floor now. heh heh


From: Hog Heaven | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 08 November 2001 02:16 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It is lifted. A little bruised, but lifted. Now it is time for your jaw to hit th efloor. I wholeheartedly agree with you, also. Baby steps is the right approach. Do it once. Do it slowly. Do it right.
Now let's go out and get a hit! Kididng

From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Trinitty
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 826

posted 08 November 2001 02:26 PM      Profile for Trinitty     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I agree with both of you! Is the moon full today or something?
From: Europa | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
meades
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 625

posted 08 November 2001 06:13 PM      Profile for meades     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well, I'd like to take this moment to mention that Libby Davies gave a WONDERFUL statement in support of this bill (I watched all the proceedings that day)!

LIBBY FOR LEADER!!! LIBBY FOR LEADER!!!

Okay, I'll stop with that, It will probably get really old, really quick. But I still support Libby!!!!!

Did anyone else see Réal Ménard compare Elsie Wayne to a nagging grandmother? HILARIOUS!!!


From: Sault Ste. Marie | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 08 November 2001 08:06 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Thanks, Meades, for the picture. Now I won't make any embarassing mistakes if I go to an NDP convention. I hear she doesn't like it if people don't recognize who she is.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
NP
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 226

posted 08 November 2001 08:34 PM      Profile for NP   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post

[ 25 October 2007: Message edited by: NP ]


From: The city that rhymes with fun | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 09 November 2001 12:47 AM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I believe in legalizing every drug out there. It is my firm belief that any idiot who wants to poison him or herself in this fashion should be permitted to do so.
From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Slick Willy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 184

posted 09 November 2001 09:53 AM      Profile for Slick Willy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I believe in legalizing every drug out there. It is my firm belief that any idiot who wants to poison him or herself in this fashion should be permitted to do so.

So now you're all for the big corporations using drugs to keep workers down and dependant on their dead-end minimum wage jobs till they are used up and forgotten? Or is it that you have no problem with the sweat-shops in third world countries using children to manufacture dangerous drugs that line the pockets of the mega-CEOs and provide nothing but suffering and dispair for those children and their families?

Dr.C I thought you were far more enlightened than this.


From: Hog Heaven | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 09 November 2001 02:18 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
As an anti-free-trader, I believe in growing pot domestically by organic farmers using natural crop-rotation methods to keep tbe soil fresh, with well-paid union laborers to roll the joints.

And as for all the others, I of course would accept nothing less than good bona fide union labor in making the finished product.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Victor Von Mediaboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 554

posted 09 November 2001 04:58 PM      Profile for Victor Von Mediaboy   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
with well-paid union laborers to roll the joints

Screw that. I can roll my own damn joints, thanks!


(In case the RCMP is reading this: But of course, I'm just kidding. I would never consume a controlled substance. Never ever ever. That would be wrong.)


From: A thread has merit only if I post to it. So sayeth VVMB! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
meades
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 625

posted 09 November 2001 05:47 PM      Profile for meades     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Noah, you know I can't make a judgement on Libby's personality based on what the friends of friends have said!

I saw her on @ the end last week. She seemed more than approachable- She seemed quite jolly, to me

She was also one of the first to reply to the e-mails I sent to every minister, parliamentary secretary, secretary of state, and 'big-name' opposition leaders (I didn't send anything to the CA because they're pretty much taking the opposite stance.). Out of all the Liberals, I'd say about two were helpful. Joe Clark replied (with a REALLY long message. Most likely copied and pasted (I don't expect anything more from MP's- They've got better things to do than write me ten page replies)), Peter Stoffer replied, and then Libby did. She gave me all the excerpts of her speeches in the House of Commons about this issue, too! granted, that doesn't prove anything about personalities. If what they say is true, then I imagine that Libby just doesn't make good first impressions.

But that was on TV, and you never know. Anyway, until I meet Libby, I'll give her the benefit of the doubt.


From: Sault Ste. Marie | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
redshift
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1675

posted 10 November 2001 12:48 PM      Profile for redshift     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
so once yer all hooked on BCBUD. INC.'s great product line, the relief camps to build the 2010 olympics will be a lot easier to take.
kibble pizza, big screen wrestling and a solid six an hour, no smarts required.
unions don't roll dope and we don't need 'em either.

From: cranbrook,bc | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Slick Willy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 184

posted 10 November 2001 03:05 PM      Profile for Slick Willy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
the relief camps to build
the 2010 olympics will be a lot easier to take.

Like you could get anyone one to show up on time or even enough people who didn't forget their hammer and work boots to slap together a bench to sit and watch wrasslin' on.


From: Hog Heaven | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca