Liberals join Conservatives to pass heavy handed drug bill

It truncated my link to the NDP site, here is the correct link:

http://www.ndp.ca/press/liberals-join-conservatives-to-pass-heavy-handed...

WTG ABCers, this is what you got for your strategic voting!

I'm proud of the NDP for voting against this bill.

Liberals and Tories are so compatible that they should merge on the political right once and for all.

Bravo Libby Davies and the federal NDP for their strong principled stand against this legislation.

This is a bit much.  It's one thing to impost tough sentences on drug traffickers but 5 plants?  That's a bit insane.

Maybe if the NDP tried to campaign against the issue from a more moderate standpoint, they might get some traction on it.

You mean, like: "Incarcerate only every second person who grows weed." Yeah, that might work.

What would that be? The NDP position is hardly extreme. In this case they were merely trying to prevent a change to the status quo.

This bill is now before the Senate, who will likely pass it in the fall. You can contact your Senators and let them know your feelings about this bill here: http://www.whyprohibition.ca

Under our laws, "trafficking" includes sharing without monetary exchange. Passing a joint can be considered trafficking, just ask Marc Emery who spent two months behind bars for passing a joint in a Saskatoon park.

The Liberals know this is a bad bill. And it is the worst of hypocrisy when current pot smokers like Justin Trudeau stand up to vote for a bill like this.

I am a Director of the Vancouver Medicinal Cannabis Dispensary. Like every Compassion Club in Canada, we fall under the scope of this bill, meaning a judge would have no choice but to give me 6 months in jail if the police chose to raid our dispensary.

Hypocrisy? In Canadian Politics? You DON'T SAY!

LOL!

From the NDP site:

"... a law that by all accounts will have no effect on drug crimes in Canada."

This is clearly wrong.

By design, the new law will create more drug criminals and incarcerate many who would not otherwise see the inside of a jail.Plus, within jail there will be more crimes such as sexual assault against bewildered newbies. So yes, this law will have a significant effect on crime.
On the other hand, bored newbies in jail will no doubt pick up new trades and skills from the more experienced residents. 

Privatised prisons: a growth industry for hard times

Contrarianna, that is a good example of how the NDP while taking a far more progressive stance than the Con/Liberal coaltion immediately concedes on the terms of debate.  This should be a major wedge issue, its out of step with a lot of Canadians and the Liberals look as scary as Stephen Harper.  Unfortunately, the NDP hasn't shown much killer instinct in a long time.  Now if Duceppe could get excited about this, you might see some genuinely effective and headline grabbing attacks.

How disengenuous of you Contrarianna as it is followed by:

“Mandatory minimums have been an expensive failure in the United States, divert needed resources from prevention, treatment, and harm reduction measures, and further criminalize what must be recognized as a public health issue,” said New Democrat Substance Abuse Critic Libby Davies.

The John Howard Society, the Canadian Bar Association and Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network who testified on C-15, all warned that these sentences mostly target low-level drug users and street dealers, and not the drug-lords and king-pins that the Conservatives have promised to go after. 

“Not one witness, not one study, could show that mandatory minimums work to reduce drug use or drug crimes,” said Davies. “The U.S. is repealing these laws as fast as they can, so why is Canada moving backwards on this issue?”

So in actual fact Libby stated exactly what you did.

Not so.
It was a particular declarative statement I was responding to therefore not out of context:
 
"... a law that by all accounts will have no effect on drug crimes in Canada."

That statement may well have been a slip rather than bad faith and I was not slamming the admirable NDP dissent from the Lib/Con support for this pernicious bill. Perhaps Libby may have meant "drug usage statistics", but she didn't say that.

None of the quotes really address my criticism of the questionable statement that portrays the bill as drug-crime-neutral. They suggest that the proposed law will yield no better results for real crime fighting and will focus on the wrong dealers and users.

In addition to my previous remarks, the effect of criminalizing, for example, even minor marijuana players would result in them either refraining from causual exchanges leaving the supplying to others, or  make them more "professional" in their methods and associations when the threat of excessive penalties are there.

And it would move more of (the eg marijuana ) exchanges away from casual user/growers and acquaintances into the hand of minions of professional gangs--with all that entails.

Both these shifts-contrary to the statement in question-- WILL have "an effect on drug crimes in Canada"--and it will be a very bad one which will also feed other organized crime activity to the detriment of society.

Well you can parse the wording of the NDP website, and I suppose the correct wording should have been that the new law will "have no effect on drug use" in Canada.

But the fact is that Libby Davies has been one of the top voices for drug policy reform in Parliament for many years.

And she has worked within her party to get the NDP on board with this issue, building support for Insite, medicinal marijuana access, harm reduction and marijuana legalization.

The NDP and the BQ worked to try and stop this bill, but the Liberals pushed it through with the Conservatives.

I am worried for the many ordinary Canadians who will find themselves in jail once this bill passes.

man wtf this just gonna mean more niggas in jail wtf is the point of that str8 up think of the gym owners lol Nobody uses them anymore cuz ppl just go to jail and get stronger and im not even joking lol

The right to alter one's consciousness is about as fundamental a human right as there is. Repression breeds resistance. Legalize it!

I find the use of the "n" word above to offensive and racist.

Anyone who could support this bill is a closet fascist.  Does anyone know if Keith Martin has said anything about it?  I know he's for decriminalization and it would be interesting to hear what he says about what his party is doing.

It's interesting that the minimum penalty for making hash is so long.  A guy by the name of Rick Simpson claimed he's been curing cancer with hash oil and was giving it away until they started to jail him for it.  Maybe big pharma doesn't want competition?

Keith Martin abstained from voting.

Every other Liberal in the House voted for the bill.

Martin on Decriminalization: http://blog.gokeith.ca/2009/06/decriminalize-the-simple-possession-of-po...

Stop C-15 Facebook Group: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=53485374269 [22]

Help defeat C-15, join WhyProhibition today: http://www.whyprohibition.ca/user/register [23]

Tell your Members of Parliament NO on C-15 here: http://www.whyprohibition.ca/content/vote-no-bill-c-15 [24]

Rexdale is a POC and uses hip-hop as his posting language.  It's not the same as if a white person were posting it.

I don't accept that distinction - racist language is racist language regardless of the source - and in any case I wonder who many African-Canadians appreciate having a "Punjabi" (and btw Indians are Caucasian) using racist terminology to describe them. 

Well, it's been generally accepted here on Babble.  Do the mods have anything to say about this?

ok lets start only some are carcassasian n even then they mixed most arent period. ur not a african n im not here to argue what I am, my history, my lineage, etc wit some cracca who wouldnt give 1/2 a shit, dismiss it when he got proved wrong and just be a general asshole about it.

U find it offensive? Listen this is my reply Fucc U nigga what racist terminology if I say more niggas in jail does it only mean blacc males or blacc ppl? Who is blacc? u dumfucc I am too u dont know me so plz stfu n sit down SON dont argue on something u cant win muthafucca fucc being nice to punk ass muthafuccas on this shit u need to checc urself Im gonna be me on this from now on (still not gonna use bitch tho trying to stop that)

edit- Ken dont worry about him he got a sticc up his ass n just needed to say shit sum1 proly made him feel stupid on this or on a thread.

edit - btw I couldnt resist I wonder how many africans would appreciate a "Cracca" telling one of theirs what he can and cannot say. Fucc a african-canadian, african-amerikkkan etc these countries shit they aint ours in fact they owe us shit they aint ours. ima African n I know wus happnin

edit - U dont accept that distinction? Tell me plz who the fucc are u? Some priveleged white male talking about u dont accept it? Do u think any1 gives a fucc? I dont accept ur distinction. I dont accept ur bs so ima call u on it ur talking to me about using a word that if u knew my shit u wouldnt even be arguing about while u repeatdly support a country that massacres POC. So wussup my hypocrite ass nigga who should be calling who out on shit?

Okay, let's dial it down.

Rexdale_Punjabi, you can't say things like "who the fucc are u?" and call what other posters write "bs". We try to argue on babble without invoking personal attacks or name calling. I know what you did wasn't exactly name calling but it needs to stop.

If some people, such as Stockholm in this example, don't accept how you use the word "nigga" here on babble (which we talked about ages ago when you first arrived at babble. I figured the conversation was done.) there's not a heck of a lot you or anyone can say that will change their minds.

Angry invective doesn't move the dialogue along. And I say this as someone who will occasionally use angry invective on babble.

As for the word 'cracker', there are no historical roots indicating this word is any less offensive than "white trash" and other terms that refer to white people derogatively. I personally find "white trash" to be classist and not okay, but that isn't the consensus on babble. 

Louis C K, comedian, on being white (he uses the word "cracker" at the end of this bit). Although he has 2 dicey moments, I find this an amazing piece, by a white guy, about whiteness.

.....

Edited to add: I think we reallllly don't want to go down the road of questioning the handles/nicknames of babblers, Stockholm. 

....

So is this going to return to the thread topic or what?

OK.  Couldn't the NDP propose a compromise bill that imposes mandatory time on traffickers, but moves the definition a bit so as not to capture people passing a joint at the Merritt Mountain Music Festival.  Because people who traffic drugs are nearly the lowest form of life on the planet.  But it's rude not to pass a joint at a concert.

Its confusing for sure one minute the US is talking about the plant getting them out of the shape they are in and the next minute you have Canada getting out of shape over the plant.  Obviously no one is talking and that is sad indeed as it dosen't surprise me as its more home grown greed that has law chasing the plant. 

Governments are all about force and control one minuite and the next minuite selling you a 12 pack to wash your pain killers all down while you gas up in your car and the attendant wants to know if you want to get coked.  The Liberals appear to have their own agenda or maybe they are one in the same as I'm certain parties are often supported by the same entity.  Call it getting the job done!  Because they sure have been doing a snow job on us.  I'm surprised about the position the Liberals have taken and wonder what is in it for them and am disappointed on their stand.  Good on the NDP.  And why is government really chasing crime, or making crime because under Conservative leadership crime goes up along with the costs.  I bet Governments got the solution, securtiy specialist and jailers extrodanaire have a deal for you only its going to take a life time of taxes and crime to pay for.  Is this what you want or better yet do you even have a choice?

http://rabble.ca/whatsup/stop-crime-bill-c-10-canadian-families-fiscal-a...