Prince of Pot likely to get 5 Years

Jan 14th
more on canada.com
finch451says...

Originally, I believe they were going to put him away for about 14 years, along with his two partners, but it's good to see that the charges have been lessened, and he may not serve much time.

Also, I like the fact that he had Ron Paul stickers around his office, despite the fact that he's a Canadian, haha.

drattussays...

In a twisted way some good might come out of it, though not so much for him. I was active for a time on a marijuana reform board when he got busted and a lot of tension between American and Canadian activists popped up, lots more than I expected. Pretty much the Canadians expected the Americans to love him as much as they do, that didn't happen. Some Americans were pretty pissed because he had been critical of American activists and their being more passive and less in your face than his style was, so they just figured maybe now he'd understand.

It's a bit different from Canada to the US, being the single most imprisoned nation in the world both per capita and in raw terms is a bit more meaningful on this side of the border and both sides understand what that means better now. Seem to have a new respect for each other these days, working together more than I'd seen before all of this and with less tension.

drattussays...

Progress is being made. Numerous elections have been held where the subject comes up and in the vast majority of them the side wanting to relax penalties or ok medical use has come out on top, the more information the public gets on the issue the more solid that trend seems to get. Groups such as SAFER and groups fighting the HEA provisions are doing pretty good work getting people to understand what the issues really are.

The federal level is going to be last and that's who is after Mark and the grow ops in legal medical use States, the issue has to be forced by the public first. I tend to write both serving and candidate members of Congress in both parties on the issue of reform, not just for pot, and of those who reply the following is fairly typical. Quoted directly from a saved message typos and all.

The political problem is if one starts a thoughtful conversation on the subject, those on the other-side use the bumper sticker/sound bite that one is "soft on crime." As we live in a sound bite world, people such as yourself must stage engaged, talk with media, and elected officials. In order to affect change, thoughtful people must come forward and work to change the public view so such sound bites will not automatically stop the conversation.

They won't move on it until we make it safe for them, no matter if they understand how wrong what we're doing is or not. It sucks, but that's the way it is.

Fedquipsays...

The DEA and the RCMP both agree that its dangerous to educate the public about the difference in drugs. When conducting the War on Drugs they categorize Marijuana with Heroine and Meth, there is no difference to them.

Personally I am all for drug enforcement, I have old friends who have had bad experiences with hard drugs. It's very easy for a kid to become a drug dealer and as long as marijuana is illegal it will always be a stepping stone for teenage dealers and the friends they deal too. As kids grow up there will always be the gangsta/mobster/kingpin wannabees who move on to sell harder drugs. DEA and RCMP should be using their billions of dollars to tackle the drugs and dealers that actually harm communities.

In my neighbourhood we have peaceful adult pot dealers who are cool, calm, relaxed and working individuals, but we also have shady hard dealers who bring riff raff into our neighbourhood. The cops all over north america treat the pot dealers the same as hard dealers, I feel most people agree that with the money spent on the "war on drugs" is being spent inefficiently, I would hope our society isn't going to spend another decade practicing the status quo of throwing people in jail. Hard drug use is up up up we are failing, time to fix it. After all it is our tax money that pays for this system.

drattussays...

>> ^Fedquip:
Personally I am all for drug enforcement, I have old friends who have had bad experiences with hard drugs.


Same here, outside of a very few idealistic or extreme types I'd think most would agree including many who are accused of or assumed to hold other positions. There are differences in how to enforce or regulate it but the idea that it should be controlled as tightly as we can make it work isn't disputed by many. Most of the dispute is in what actually does work and how to get from here to there. Results based and with an eye toward reducing damage rather than fulfilling an idealistic goal I'm fine with, as are most I've dealt with. What we're doing now doesn't work.

Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists




notify when someone comments
X

This website uses cookies.

This website uses cookies to improve user experience. By using this website you consent to all cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

I agree
  
Learn More