"More youth should be using cannabis."
"This might sound like a controvertial statement..."
"Nutty" would more properly describe it.
NDP Convention
Sun, 2009-07-26 20:56
#52
Sun, 2009-07-26 22:04
#53
I think the neocons have for years already been promotting anything with a anti prohibition tune to it as blashemy. They sure didn't waste any time exposing a you tube video of an ndp candidate doing a drug in the last election. The neocon and specifically harpers conservatives are ruthless and will stop at nothing to discredit competition. If anything the NDP should come out and really push the anti prohibition agenda and get every pot smoking hippie out there to vote and really rattle some cages.
It's inevitable that all drugs will be legal someday and made available in a more medical approach and context to the problem. The drug war has been lost...and the consequences are just starting to occur...the criminal aspects have been brought to the forefront and I think most would agree the cost is too high even in financial terms....the next aspect will be the viral one whose consequences are just about to start.
The NDP can save us from this mess and actually the NDP are the only party that can. The sooner people wake up and realize that losing a war has fatal consequences the sooner we can move on.
Sun, 2009-07-26 22:04
#54
I think the neocons have for years already been promotting anything with a anti prohibition tune to it as blashemy. They sure didn't waste any time exposing a you tube video of an ndp candidate doing a drug in the last election. The neocon and specifically harpers conservatives are ruthless and will stop at nothing to discredit competition. If anything the NDP should come out and really push the anti prohibition agenda and get every pot smoking hippie out there to vote and really rattle some cages.
It's inevitable that all drugs will be legal someday and made available in a more medical approach and context to the problem. The drug war has been lost...and the consequences are just starting to occur...the criminal aspects have been brought to the forefront and I think most would agree the cost is too high even in financial terms....the next aspect will be the viral one whose consequences are just about to start.
The NDP can save us from this mess and actually the NDP are the only party that can. The sooner people wake up and realize that losing a war has fatal consequences the sooner we can move on.
Sun, 2009-07-26 23:20
#55
"More youth should be using cannabis."
"This might sound like a controvertial statement...""Nutty" would more properly describe it.
You see cannabis as a dangerous recreational drug.
I see cannabis as a beneficial medicinal herb.
You believe that people who use cannabis are hurting themselves and making an irresponsible choice.
I see people every day whose lives and health are drastically improved through their use of cannabis.
Cannabis is the world's most beneficial herbal medicine, with an amazing array of medicinal uses.
Here's a recent article from the Vancouver Sun about teens using marijuana for medicinal purposes.
Some B.C. teens take marijuana for pain and anxiety, study finds'They weren't smoking to get high but . . . because they needed to'
BY AMY O'BRIAN, VANCOUVER SUN
APRIL 24, 2009Not all teenagers smoke marijuana with the goal of getting high. A new study by researchers at the University of B.C. found some teens use marijuana to relieve or manage health problems when other therapies have not worked.
The study, led by UBC Okanagan professor Joan Bottorff, involved in-depth interviews with 63 teenagers who use marijuana. Of those, 20 said they use the drug to manage health problems such as depression, anxiety, difficulty sleeping or pain.
"They were very clear they weren't smoking to get high, but they were really smoking marijuana because they needed to," Bottorff said Thursday in an interview. "They talked about how they didn't smoke too much. They tried to adjust their dosage so they just smoked enough to deal with their symptoms. And the majority usually smoked by themselves."
Many of the teens had tried conventional treatments for their health problems, but said the medication didn't work or they didn't like the side-effects. Those who reported sleeping difficulties said they had talked to a doctor about it, but had not been prescribed any medication because of their age.
"One young woman said she hadn't slept in four years," Bottorff said.
One of the young men had been diagnosed with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder --also known as ADHD -- but said the medication he'd been given hadn't worked.
"He decided he didn't want to take [the ADHD drugs] any more and actually found that marijuana really helped him focus, do his school work, and really be successful in school."
All of the 63 teens in the study used marijuana regularly, ranging in frequency from every day to twice a month. They were between the ages of 13 and 18 and were from three communities in B.C.
Note the teen who says that marijuana helped him do better in school. I have met many teens over the years who found that pot helped them focus academically much better than Ritalin, and with fewer side effects.
I think it would be better for these kids to have access to quality medicinal-grade products, including non-smokable alternatives like cookies, capsules, tinctures and so on.
You can read the whole Vancouver Sun article here: http://www.tinyurl.com/teenmedpot
The neocon and specifically harpers conservatives are ruthless and will stop at nothing to discredit competition. They sure didn't waste any time exposing a you tube video of an ndp candidate doing a drug in the last election.
For the record, it was the Liberals which released my videos to the media. Not that the Liberals aren't neo-cons...
The NDP can save us from this mess and actually the NDP are the only party that can. The sooner people wake up and realize that losing a war has fatal consequences the sooner we can move on.
Yes I agree that the NDP can save us from this mess, and that they may be the only party that can. Thanks for your support BuddyKat. I hope you are coming to the convention?
Mon, 2009-07-27 05:19
#56
"For the record, it was the Liberals which released my videos to the media. Not that the Liberals aren't neo-cons..."
They aren't.
But damn the torpedoes, the political details, the average voter's perception and the party's electoral chances.
You would have sold the crowd in the days of the medicine show circuit, DL.
Mon, 2009-07-27 11:22
#57
You make my point Lombar.
The little ones should be protected from exposure to pot, racist thought and poverty. All good, social democratic goals.
Cop out on your own adult time, should you "choose unwisely", as you put it in your grownup's wisdom. Don't leave it to a child to choose. That is the height of irresponsible nonsense.
Except the current laws protect noboby from drugs. The 'little ones' that do fall by the wayside so to speak are much more likely to be exploited. I only made your point in your imagination. The child *will* choose, the matter at hand is the possible consequences. You require the law to be there to burden their lives with a criminal record, possible prison, all to scare them away? Doesnt work. When I was 12, dope was just as easy to get as it is for 12 year olds now.
Mon, 2009-07-27 11:28
#58
ce n'est pas en français.
Comment est-ce qu'on dit «pwnt» en français? «Apprtnt»? 
Sadly, we were so going to go to this one, being practically in our back yard. No to be though. 
Mon, 2009-07-27 11:31
#59
George Victor, it would be fabulous if you could get through this thread without personally attacking the person you're disagreeing with.
Consider this to be not just a suggestion. Thanks.
Mon, 2009-07-27 18:51
#60
This grandfather will try to be on his best behaviour discussing this topic in future when forming descriptive phrases to describe the subjects' merits and antecedents.
A warning is a warning, to paraphrase Gertrude.
Poppa George
Mon, 2009-07-27 19:31
#61
Except the current laws protect noboby from drugs. The 'little ones' that do fall by the wayside so to speak are much more likely to be exploited. I only made your point in your imagination. The child *will* choose, the matter at hand is the possible consequences. You require the law to be there to burden their lives with a criminal record, possible prison, all to scare them away? Doesnt work. When I was 12, dope was just as easy to get as it is for 12 year olds now.
Yeah exactly. I feel a lot of anger towards George's view partly because I've seen it do a lot of harm to people I care about.
I know a couple who adopted four girls who had a rough life, including a lot of exposure to abuse and serious destructive addiction. Two of the girls were pre-teens when they were adopted. The grandfather, someone who the family constantly involved and invited over for dinner and sleep overs found out that the adopted father had a bag of grass in his sock drawer-promptly turned on the family, involved the police and took custody of the two older girls despite social services and other family members all pointing out that they were lucky to be in such a healthy and loving home. And then a year later, he kicked out the youngest of the two girls onto the street for disobeying him where she soon developed a Crystal meth habit. He still doesn't talk to her while the couple who never stopped loving her, continues to provide financial and emotional assistance to her. Despite the grandfather's age, he is the only person I know who I think I would have to fight the urge to punch if I ever saw him again.
Marijuana is an early introduction to kids about adult hypocrisy and it's a dangerous one as when it comes to drugs, credible and honest information from adults you can trust is extremely important because they are very easy to get. Just as there are lots of old school people who think that children are best off with no sex education there are those that think criminalizing drug use protects their grandchildren.
Mon, 2009-07-27 19:51
#62
remind
Good post melovesproles, this grandmother wants to see marijuanna legalized for several reasons.
Mon, 2009-07-27 20:24
#63
remind
Everyone else already has, and you never listened to them either. And indeed it does describe a good many.
Mon, 2009-07-27 20:35
#64
The above anecdotal account may not exactly describe the Canadian family.
No, I never said it did. It describes a Canadian family. I've never met the Canadian family. Maybe you could describe them? Does the father drink Crown Royal and tall cans of Molson and is breakfast always served with maple syrup?
Mon, 2009-07-27 20:41
#65
I think it's the grandfather who sets the situation apart from some (almost any) norm. We old farts more often mellow and grow more kindly.
Mon, 2009-07-27 20:43
#66
Care to share them? (I really can't find 'em in this thread. Maybe it's the eyes.}
The above anecdotal account may not exactly describe the Canadian family.
Mon, 2009-07-27 20:50
#67
remind
LOL
Tue, 2009-07-28 04:00
#68
George is a puddycat compared to the real enemies on the right....dont sweat it George as you have been fed garbage as facts for 80 years dont forget and really if you check the house of commons records you will see wording like "dirty mexicans " and "chinks " mentioned in the same sentences as they brought in laws to stop zero drug activity.....
Read "the black candle" or look on the back of a $50 dollar bill where theres the crazy lady who has caused more shit in our drug laws than anyone else...emily murphy
You can find the real truth if you really want to
I can send you a photo of obama smoking a joint will that help?
All 3 of the last USA presidents have used cannabis and two admitted to cocaine....based on the gateway bullshit ....as really mothers milk is the gateway drug ....but how come these presidents are not heroin addicts????
To see the real enemies look here......
http://www.bloggingtories.ca/forums/topic7181.html
Where this neanderthal showed how stupid some are..........
"""""""""Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 9:09 pm Post subject: Should we legalize Marijuana (pot) ??
Since the mid-1960s we have been building a proportion of our society that has no respect for our institutions or laws. These wise guys and gals think speed limits are for losers, that 'the man' has no business telling them that they can't toke, that they should be able to take their tattoos, body piercings and half-naked bodies anywhere, that only fools get married, that only idiots go to church, that casual sex is better than none, and that if it feels good do it. They tend to be brash, impolite, unmannerly, selfish, hedonistic and amoral. They have no idea what manners and decorum are. They think that pregnancy is a nuisance unrelated to their behaviour. However, they want help, reassurance and sympathy if they get in an accident, get pregnant or, heaven forbid, get arrested and charged with a crime. These people think it is fine to phone or text and toke or drink while speeding and weaving in and out of traffic because they have important stuff to do. They are, thank God, an immature and irresponsible minority, but they are the main proponents of legalizing pot. They don't care about society, peace, order or security or anything or anyone. All they want is for society to allow them a selfish entitlement to toke. They are the despotic, useless, whining, snivelling brats who infest our society and refuse to grow up and take personal responsibility.
The truly sad thing is the number of legislators described above."""""""""
Now I think we can in all fairness say that some are like this and only use alcohol ...as fact !!
The writer I mean!!
Tue, 2009-07-28 13:56
#69
Speaking of legislators, Canada's most famous legislator - the fellow who ensured we remained independent of the land of the free to the south - was known to tipple. But even in his cups, he made good sense.
I would say more, but I am afraid of winding up in censorial limbo.
Tue, 2009-07-28 19:44
#70
Speaking of legislators, Canada's most famous legislator - the fellow who ensured we remained independent of the land of the free to the south - was known to tipple. But even in his cups, he made good sense.
Canadian history is full of alcoholic politicians... From John A MacDonald all the way to Gary Doer, Ralph Klein, Gordon Campbell and many more...
At every NDP Convention I have attended (about 13 of them) alcohol is a major focus for fundraising and socializing. Speakers and leaders often speak of debating issues "over a beer."
It might be nice to have a few tokers in the mix, wouldn't it?
There's a famous picture of Pierre Trudeau smoking from a hookah.
Tue, 2009-07-28 19:54
#71
There's a famous picture of Pierre Trudeau smoking from a hookah.
The NDP would have yanked his candidate's papers.
Tue, 2009-07-28 20:00
#72
Yes, the Liberals are so much better. Or the NDP is no different, one or the other.
Wed, 2009-07-29 00:02
#73
And evaluating people and parties by their openess to cannabis is where you wind up. But what do the uninitiated know, eh, Sway?
Wed, 2009-07-29 00:13
#74
RevolutionPlease
So says the great moralist. He's so greatly read. :rolleyes:
Wed, 2009-07-29 01:09
#75
And evaluating people and parties by their openess to cannabis is where you wind up. But what do the uninitiated know, eh, Sway?
No offence meant George.
In my times learning about the issue ...almost 19 years ...I will say I have found that the corruption and greed are so saterated through out society that actually a civil war may be the only remidy to live in peace with our own bodies....sadly
As I have said ....please help me re-criminalize alcohol to get the real culprit in society....but alas I always come back to the conclusion that yes...it is far safer legal than illegal...far cheaper on taxpayers.....and to the majority not even a problem infact sometimes the reasons they ever found the guts to even get a date
no prison has ever been built where illegal drugs have not been found....how then will you keep them out of schools and how many more million tax dollars will it require?
there are no drive by shootings at liquor stores
kids can get meth crack or moms legal pharmaceuticals easier than getting good clean regulated alcohol...go figure
Like I said...I am a military vet ex revenue Canada dept head banker real estate broker...quite libertarian actually if not conservative at my core...I hate waste
the facts speak for themselves sadly the media is not concerned with the facts unless it is advertising revenues
I have met and talked with those cured of life ending cancer with hemp oil...and zero else
so much much more and still nothing changes......
the human animal is a selfish self possessed beast only educate-able when its not just full of just itself
cheers and good luck George...the truth is out there sometimes morals blind us but we still get a choice
Wed, 2009-07-29 01:10
#76
Yes, the Liberals are so much better. Or the NDP is no different, one or the other.
Neither.
The NDP doesn't take risks in a good cause.
Ask Kirk and Dana and Ray.
Wed, 2009-07-29 01:14
#77
Cueball
Are we going to get back to the point that Marijuana convictions are one of the primary means for "criminalizing" the lower classes, because of the extreme inequity through which our judicial system works. The well heeled can afford the lawyers that get them off the charge, while the less well off will often be forced to cop a plea, especially those who get caught doing small time dealing to make ends meet, and enter the legal system rotisery of the justice system.
Wed, 2009-07-29 02:20
#78
Not talking morals here, Revolution Please.
Reductionism flowing from ignorance.
It's okay,Michelle. I am not accusing RP of ignorance. Unread, perhaps.
Wed, 2009-07-29 03:06
#79
Cueball
Saying someone is "not well read", is basically calling them ignorant. It takes substantial ignorance not to know that.
Wed, 2009-07-29 03:32
#80
Dana Larsen wrote:
There's a famous picture of Pierre Trudeau smoking from a hookah.
The NDP would have yanked his candidate's papers.
Well let's be fair here. The NDP let me be a candidate despite me being an outspoken marijuana activist. The NDP accepted me as a candidate, and that is something you can be sure the Liberals and Conservatives would never do.
Boris St-Maurice, the former leader of the Canadian Marijuana Party, is a Liberal now. Do you think the Liberals would let him ever run as a candidate? I doubt it.
To take from my experience that "the NDP hates pot smokers" is not accurate at all.
If the NDP had been less tolerant, they would not have had their problems with my nomination. But the BC Provincial Council, which screens potential candidates, decided that just because I was an outspoken pot smoker and anti-prohibition activist was no reason to deny my a nomination.
So for this tolerance and open-mindedness towards the cannabis community, the NDP should be congratulated.
However, the council didn't ever even call me to discuss my past and find out more about me. I was always honest on the forms they had us fill out, but there was never a sit-down or discussion with me and anyone within the party and campaign team. If they had asked me to come and discuss my past and my activism then issues like controversial videos and writings could have been discussed and contingencies planned for.
I spoke with a BC NDP Council member after, who had been there when they had gone over my application to be a candidate. He said they decided that since I had never even been arrested, that everything I said was in line with party policy, that many other candidates admitted to smoking pot or having previous marijuana convictions, they didn't consider being a pot-smoker was a big deal and approved my nomination.
So I was the candidate for over a year before an election was called, and I campaigned and did my candidate work.
Then about two weeks before the election was actually called, I got a call from Gerry Scott, who I think had fairly recently started working on the election campaign and had just realized who I was. He called me, along with the then party secretary, and alternately threatened and begged me to resign my nomination. He complained about my candidate's website, about my affiliation with the Vancouver Seed Bank, my authorship of Hairy Pothead, and so on. He asked me forcefully to resign my nomination.
I told him no. I said if he wanted me to resign then he should have Jack Layton call me. I said if Jack asked me to resign I would do it no problem. But I told him I had the support of my riding, and I was not going to resign, and he was only hired to run the campaign, not an elected person. After pressuring me intensly for over an hour, he finally backed down and said he was going to keep an eye on me and that I had better not make trouble as a candidate.
I didn't hear from him again until 10 days into the campaign, when the Liberals contacted the Globe and Mail with a story that I had a "cocaine shop" and simultaneously contacted CBC with carefully edited footage from my Pot-TV shows.
Gerry Scott flipped out and was ordering me to resign right away. I didn't really want to, but I could see that my campaign team was not going to be able to resist the pressure and in the heat and pressure of the momentI agreed to resign. I first asked to talk to Jack but Scott wouldn't help me to do that, he wanted me to resign quickly, and in the end I agreed to do so.
I feel that if the party had been better prepared, we could have dealt with this all better. Of course I should have been more aggressive in ensuring that the party knew more about the controversial things I have done. I should have written down on their form that I had filmed a series of Pot-TV shows a decade earlier. But I assumed that there would be some sort of discussion to get into such details, and that discussion and planning never happened.
Like with any party, there are factions within the NDP. Most NDPers believe in decriminalizing or legalizing marijuana and recognize the harms caused by our prohibitionist drug policies. Some of these people would include Libby Davies, Bill Siksay and I'd say also Jack Layton. But there's significant people in the party who don't want to be tainted as "stoners" and who see endorsement of better drug policies as a vote-loser. Folks like Carole James, Gerry Scott and Brad Lavigne seem to fall into this camp.
There's plenty of ways my nomination could have been handled better by everyone, me included of course. But I would also hope that having smoked pot or taken LSD doesn't make one ineligible for public office in Canada!
Wed, 2009-07-29 09:04
#81
Scott Piatkowski
Canadian history is full of alcoholic politicians... From John A MacDonald all the way to Gary Doer, Ralph Klein, Gordon Campbell and many more...
Gordon Campbell is an alcoholic? Everyone is aware of his Hawaiian adventure, but I've never heard it alleged that he is an alcoholic.
Gary Doer is an alcoholic? I've never heard that at all.
Wed, 2009-07-29 09:25
#82
Gary Doer is an alcoholic? I've never heard that at all.
Yeah, from what I hear, Doer really likes the sauce.
Wed, 2009-07-29 09:50
#83
Cueball:
Saying someone is "not well read", is basically calling them ignorant. It takes substantial ignorance not to know that.
You're right, of course, Cue. I had just wakened in the wee hours from a nightmare in which Canadian social democracy had been reduced to the virtues of smoking marijuana, and all other issues, survival of the species, the means formaintaining a civilized society in the face of public concerns about taxes, the loss of our industries (American judges had just approved the Nortel sale to Swedish industry.)
The air was filled with smoke and one-liners that went nowhere, because the proponents could not maintain coherent conversation. Laurels were worn by people with fixed expressions, dancing around giant green plants, and who from time to time genuflected in the direction of the shrubbery.
Thank goodness for the light of day and the discovery that there's not an actual movement toward genuflexion in the real world. It's more a verbal obeisance, involving one-liners that trail off in the smoke.
Wed, 2009-07-29 10:02
#84
remind
Scott, Gordo admitted problems with alcohol and stated he was going into a program for it.
Wed, 2009-07-29 10:22
#85
I don't want to get sidetracked - but there is a very, very big difference between being a person who likes to drink from time to time and being an "alcoholic"...then there is that gray area category of having a "drinking problem".
Wed, 2009-07-29 12:00
#86
Yes the alcohol fans will justify all they do as just natural......hypocrites they are.
I guess I could just post it but for now I will just explain because of your twisted version above.
I do remember larsen when you betrayed another candidate and were rewarded with an uncontested nomination as all others yes had a meeting with council to be approved.....did it slip your mind ? and do you need me to post it all here?
No biggy just say the word or lie about it again and it will be linked.
Seems he cooperated with gerry scott and after the meeting and as he ignored the member himself and then just after midnight posted at two groups....eNDProhibition being one of them....(I think you said 700 were members)...anyway as larsen cooperated and wrote for gerry scott that the other activist had cocaine issues !! and yes was not suitable as a candidate after meeting the council for his comrade..... also a leader of endpro .....and who had in fact set up the meeting in the first place. Nice !!
No such real truth involved..it never happened and was just a set up lie to silence the other long time candidate.
So to recap larsen cooperated and during the night sent out that horrible slanderous post accusing his up to then friend of cocaine abuse and because of it he himself would then not be vetted !!!....I mean until later of course....LOL
Of course it was a lie and many were quite pleased when the LSD party's new leader ...larsen .....had karma come up and kick his own ass.
Would you like me to post it all?
Please do not pretend it all did not happen as its only a google search away.
You even posted it at cannabis culture...."why john shavluk hates me""
That's why you did not do the interview then ....as they needed you to silence your partner...shavluk.
I believe the next election will finally get larsen seeing the light as even after this soon coming convention with no cannabis resolutions reaching the floor he will yes continue in his uncle tom role as he thinks at some point everyone will just forget all these blunders like above or videos of abusing LSD.... DMT and all while driving ....yes...how about that video of 50 joints in your mouth ?
Yes all the while not realizing some within the party always knew what he had done and told many he was to be toast because of his traitorous behavior and yes as has been shown.
I wish you would open your eyes and just get it...I really do.
But trust me I will just sit and wait as karma continues to show you what you did.
I can as I say post from other sites to back this all up including larsen admitting all I say.
Now getting all the facts together it is very easy to see why you were dumped...my problem is how you ruined it for a man with three kids.... who is a member of the bar in two countries and did not !!....deserve to be caught in your wake... mr kirk tousaw.
Keep giving these ndp these lies and I will keep speaking the truth that you omit.....OK?...OK
Its the ndp thing to do is it not?
Wed, 2009-07-29 12:54
#87
The nightmare figure again, and in broad daylight.
Wed, 2009-07-29 16:58
#88
I don't want to get sidetracked - but there is a very, very big difference between being a person who likes to drink from time to time and being an "alcoholic"...then there is that gray area category of having a "drinking problem".
OK maybe I am pushing it by calling some of those people "alcoholics."
Perhaps a term like "problem drinker" might be more appropriate?
Maybe "heavy drinker" is a better term for Gary Doer. I know when I have seen him at NDP conventions he is usually buzzed, he has a red nose, and he jokes about having to drink a beer with every delegate and things like that.
Certainly Gordon Campbell was also known to enjoy drinking. I understand that he quit drinking entirely after his drunk driving conviction. But I also know that many people define themselves as "alcoholics" even if they have not had a drink in many years.
Alcohol is certainly used as a political lubricant, by every political party.
Considering that alcohol is known to make people more violent, less considerate and less able to think rationally, it cannot be a good thing that so many of our politicians are regular drinkers?
Wed, 2009-07-29 17:08
#89
I do remember larsen when you betrayed another candidate and were rewarded with an uncontested nomination as all others yes had a meeting with council to be approved.....did it slip your mind ? and do you need me to post it all here?
I'm not going to bother continually re-debating these things which happened so long ago.
If anyone actually cares enough to catch up on the origins of this ongoing grudge which Shavluk/sway has against me, you can read about it here: http://tinyurl.com/shavlukvsdana (In that thread Shavluk is posting as Andromeda and EverythingsIrie.)
Wed, 2009-07-29 17:38
#90
Shavluk/sway has left the building. This was a particularly rambling and incoherent incarnation.
Wed, 2009-07-29 18:48
#91
-.-
Wed, 2009-07-29 18:57
#92
Cueball
You're right, of course, Cue. I had just wakened in the wee hours from a nightmare in which Canadian social democracy had been reduced to the virtues of smoking marijuana, and all other issues, survival of the species, the means formaintaining a civilized society in the face of public concerns about taxes, the loss of our industries (American judges had just approved the Nortel sale to Swedish industry.)
Being "criminalized" through systemic bias against poor people for activities linked to the very common practice of recreational use of Marijuana is a serious issue, and one that highlights the increasing tendency of the NDP to ignore the criminalization of the poor by the state, through the criminal justice system, through the NDP's support of "tough on crime" legislation that aims to increase the footprint of national security state.
Wed, 2009-07-29 19:14
#93
You've lost me, Cue. Whatever are you saying?
There is some sort of accusation in that seriously convoluted sentence. Take a deep breath and another run at it, please.
Phew...yes, your revised statement suggests I'm only part of a failing faction in the NDP and I'm not being accused of serious crime against a fellow babbler (my dialup connection had failed)
But let me see if I'm right in my reading of the revision.
Wed, 2009-07-29 19:18
#94
remind
Thank you old goat.
And I agree Cue!
That was until you edited it and put in the NDP nonsense after I posted. Hardly fair cue, eh!
Wed, 2009-07-29 19:24
#95
Cueball
The justice system is biased against the poor. Nuisance crimes, morality crimes and crime of failing to comply (failure to appear for example) are one of the chief means through which poor people become "criminalized", since they can not afford proper legal councel to protect them from these spurious charges. Sometimes they can not even get out on bail. As a consequence, rather than having the charges dismissed, or turned into a slap on the wrist, they are more likely to plead, and get their first criminal conviction, a conviction which blots their record forever, even impacting their ability to get gainful employment in education, security and many other fields. As well with charges on their record, any future breaches of the law are weighed more seriously.
A social democratic party should be alliviating the duress placed upon the poor by reducing the consequences of petty crimes or elminating them, and lobbying for increased legal services to ensure that persons are fairly treated under the law, not supporting mandatory sentencing laws.
How do you save money in the criminal justice system? Stop charging people for bullshit. Money saved can be rerouted to legal aid.
Wed, 2009-07-29 21:26
#96
You lost me on 'reducing the consequences of petty crime'.
I guess it depends on what you mean by consequences and petty.
Certainly when our car was vandalized and we were out $500 we could ill afford requesting the consequences be restitution did not feel all that out of whack with what happened to us.
Wed, 2009-07-29 22:15
#97
The justice system is biased against the poor. Nuisance crimes, morality crimes and crime of failing to comply (failure to appear for example) are one of the chief means through which poor people become "criminalized", since they can not afford proper legal councel to protect them from these spurious charges. Sometimes they can not even get out on bail. As a consequence, rather than having the charges dismissed, or turned into a slap on the wrist, they are more likely to plead, and get their first criminal conviction, a conviction which blots their record forever, even impacting their ability to get gainful employment in education, security and many other fields. As well with charges on their record, any future breaches of the law are weighed more seriously.A social democratic party should be alliviating the duress placed upon the poor by reducing the consequences of petty crimes or elminating them, and lobbying for increased legal services to ensure that persons are fairly treated under the law, not supporting mandatory sentencing laws.
How do you save money in the criminal justice system? Stop charging people for bullshit. Money saved can be rerouted to legal aid.
Its telling that some Social Democrats on here are are so confused by Cueball's posts. I would have thought this stuff would be pretty 101. The Cons and the Liberals are pushing hard to make it even easier to criminalize the poor over total bullshit that middle class people get away with without thinking twice-flaunting their behaviour as a sign that they are hip and cool. Then people from the same class demean those people who oppose these laws as just wanting to get high because for people in their social strata that's all it is about. It shows a serious disconnect with the reality of the poor and working class Canadians they claim to represent. The NDP are still the best alternative in my riding but I'd prefer to vote for a politician like Duceppe that has the courage to call Harper and his sadistic cronies for what they are. I think if we see the Federal NDP show the ignorance of the situation in BC that they did in the last election then we might eventually have to work on the growth of our own Bloc. And the Ontarioan Social Democrats who think marijuana is an irrelevant issue can stop straining themselves from having to learn about the economic and social realities on the other side of the country.
Wed, 2009-07-29 22:24
#98
Cueball
We are talking about "victimless" crimes, here. Morality crimes, nusiance crimes and adminstrative crimes. I know a person (Ogala Sioux) who essentially ended up spending 3 months in jail for a first offence driving without a license, after being put through the legal meatgrinder of court appearances, failure to show for an meeting with a social worker, and so on and so forth. I know another guy who spent 3 month in jail awaiting trial on a (first offence) drug charge that was later reduced to a traffic ticket for J-walking, simply because no one he knew could raise the bail.
Another friend of mine (Jamaican) was put in jail for breach of probation because he showed up a day late for his last scheduled meeting with his probation officer.
Wed, 2009-07-29 22:29
#99
Cueball
It's not even on the "other side of the country". Its strictly a class issue. Lots and lots of people are criminalized in this manner in Ontario. The incidents I just outlined are from the Ontario court system, as is this case: 10 Weeks in Jail for Nothing, a thread I posted that recieved no comment from the "social democratic" caucus around here.
Many people in this country live in absolute fear of the police because they are affraid of getting jacked up on bullshit charges like that.
Wed, 2009-07-29 22:33
#100
We are talking about "victimless" crimes, here. Morality crimes, nusiance crimes and adminstrative crimes. I know a person (Ogala Sioux) who essentially ended up spending 3 months in jail for a first offence driving without a license, after being put through the legal meatgrinder of court appearances, failure to show for an meeting with a social worker, and so on and so forth. I know another guy who spent 3 month in jail awaiting trial on a (first offence) drug charge that was later reduced to a traffic ticket for J-walking, simply because no one he knew could raise the bail.
Another friend of mine (Jamaican) was put in jail for breach of probation because he showed up a day late for his last scheduled meeting with his probation officer.
Thanks Cueball that helps me understand what you mean. I guess the term 'petty' was what threw me.
Wed, 2009-07-29 22:42
#101
It's not even on the "other side of the country". Its strictly a class issue. Lots and lots of people are criminalized in this manner in Ontario. The incidents I just outlined are from the Ontario court system, as is this case: 10 Weeks in Jail for Nothing, a thread I posted that recieved no comment from the "social democratic" caucus around here.
Many people in this country live in absolute fear of the police because they are affraid of getting jacked up on bullshit charges like that.
I missed that story and thread. I will go post something in it, but I wanted to say thanks for bring it to attention.