Kirk,

I hear Bill C2 (mandatory body fluid tests for drivers who appear to be impaired) is in it's second reading in the SENATE! Can you get the BCCLA to pay for you to speak to that?

The BCCLA will not pay, but typically doesn't need to. If someone is asked to be a witness, the government picks up the tab for flight, room, and per diem. I have gotten BCCLA approval to testify on its behalf, and I have contacted the Clerk of the Committee and indicated my interest in appearing.

Hi everyone, I'm an outraged Newbie

I just discovered this forum as I was trying to figure out what is going on with Bill C-26.

I haven't smoked marijuana for a very long time, but many years ago marijuana helped me find a sense of life still being good at a very difficult time, so I kind of feel I have an IOU. I also know a lot of kind, honest people who contribute a lot to our community who like a toke now and then. A few highly respected people in my community have been busted for supplementing their seasonal employment by growing a few plants. So in that way too I have an IOU.

When I heard a brief mention on CBC radio about the plans to give people growing one pot plant a mandatory 6 months, I was shocked and began asking some serious questions.

The more I learn the more concerned I get.

As it is estimated the BC marijuana industry may be as big as logging, I am wondering WHY the plans to scare this many people out of having a job, aren't getting more media attention? If they planned to put all the loggers or fish farmers in jail, that would certainly get a lot more media attention and discussion than this is.

Why is it that the many scientific studies that show fish farming and Co2 are a problem get endlessly disputed, and those who are supposed to be serving us as leaders do nothing, even though these businesses endanger life on this planet as we know it. On the other hand, the many studies that have been done by reputable scientists showing marijuana is relatively harmless are ignored, and instead any study suggesting any possible harmful effect to a small percentage users, gets blown up into this big melodrama and turned into a major violent crime. How can such glaring double standards be justified in a fair and democratic society?

As I understand it, portraying an identifiable group as being associated with violent crime and social problems, when this is only occasionally true, is unfairly defamatory. As this type of propaganda can be used to justify unfair scapegoating, discrimination and violence, we have laws to protect identifiable groups from hate speech.

I don't know much about law, but I would guess marijuana smokers are sort of in between being an identifiable group that would be protected by the laws against inciting hatred, and being considered as a controversial business, such as logging and fish farming. These controversial industries rightly deserve to be subjected to a debate, and I notice, in the case of things like fish farming and logging that media like CBC is always careful to give equal time to both sides. Why does the policy seem to be so different when it comes to covering both sides of the marijuana debate?

One of the things that is bothering me is that media like CBC doesn't seem to be giving this much attention at all, and the attention this issue is receiving seems exceedingly one sided.

Marijuana smokers and growers are constantly portrayed by the media as either a joke or as violent criminals, or they just aren't discussed at all.

The other day on CBC radio's Almanac program, they had a call in show on drinking and driving. A couple callers called in and said how accidents caused by people driving while impaired on marijuana was a HUGE problem.

A member of MADD, a group I usually wholeheartedly support, was a guest on the show, and she agreed with the callers, saying this is why this new law getting tough on marijuana is a good idea. I emailed the Almanac program, pointing out the conclusions of the 2002 Senate Committee,,and two other more recent studies by highly credible scientific organizations, showing that by itself marijuana is only a small contributer to driving accidents, as stoned drivers know they are impaired and usually avoid driving or take other precautions. I don't know if my comment was ever read on the air. Considering how careful CBC usually is to present both sides, I am really uncomfortable with what seems to be too often one sided coverage, which promotes an unfair stigma and discrimination against an identifiable group.

I've sent the CBC numerous emails asking for more coverage on this controversy, and if they have already done this and I missed it to please tell me when and where, but they don't get back to me. Maybe they are just busy and I missed the programing.

Because of this I wanted to ask if CBC has been giving this coverage and balanced coverage, or if there is a problem here? If there is a problem, how could we put some pressure on the CBC to give this some fair and balanced coverage? I don't want my tax dollars to be funding unfair propaganda which incites hatred.

I believe equitable and rationally based laws are the very foundation of a free and democratic society. If the rational basis of our laws are allowed to be eroded through arbitrary irrational laws which can be used to imprison people, this should be of concern to all Canadians, not just people who use marijuana. I would like this point to be emphasized more. How can all these double standards be justified in a sane and democratic society, as reasonable and non arbitrary?

One of the slogans I like best is "The US is Addicted to the War on Drugs, Just Say NO"

Hey DML and Kirk,

It's in committee now (which has yet to start). I hope you get to testify Kirk. It's silly that they will give a police officer (DRE) discretion in extracting bodily fluids, they won't even need to train a dog to false alert. I can only think of how many Canadians will get upset when they are asked to give a blood sample or a piss test. It' s friggin' witch hunt, I can picture the road blocks now with cops willy nilly stopping anyone who looks like a pothead, forcing a drug test on them to label them a criminal.

What happens after these bills come out of the Senate?

Edit: Link to Senate debate recap

Good turnout at Hedy Fry's office, even though she wasn't there (was supposed to be in at 1:00, but we never saw her). Denman Street is a popular area downtown in Vancouver. It was a little chilly after a while, but not raining (thank goodness). I have to admit, though, that after 50 minutes I was a bit of a complainer... advice for the ladies trying to look good out there: never wear high heel shoes to a demonstration!

Marc, me, Rhiannon, Brandon, Heather B, and three to five others held signs I made early this morning. We handed out a bunch of "Why?" postcards, even running out about 20 minute before finishing! People actually came back to ask for more, so I gave my business card to them so they can get in touch with us for more info and handouts. Hopefully we see photos somewhere; I'll post some of the posters in a quick snapshot. Oh, CityTV also filmed us for a while and got Marc to make a statement.

We got a lot of honks from vehicles, and comments of agreement from passersby. Most of the 100-200 pedestrians were interested and gladly took our cards, some even stopping to talk and find out more. Pretty much all of them agree with us – that is, everyone but the firmly decided anti-pot people, which totaled only about 10 to 20. There were a lot of people who recognized Marc too, and said they supported him and his cause "one hundred percent, completely, absolutely" etc. Passing vehicle drivers would nod, smile or wave, while some even made toking gestures to show their "secret" signal of support!

After 90 minutes, Hedy Fry's office sent out someone with a few copies of her statement. It read positively at first, but then turns negative. It seems Hedy Fry is just placating the cannabis community because of Canadian public opinion, while really standing by the hallmarks of drug prohibition that form the issue at hand. It's not just about marijuana "decriminalization", which was the wording she used...

I'll type out what the statement said:



Notice how she stresses twice that legalization is not an option? And the severely increased fines and penalties for grow-ops? And testing for impaired driving? Since when is LSD an addictive hard drug?

Nope, don't much care for her stance. I think I have more work to do with my MP!

Hi all here is the link to global lethbridge we had some media coverage there..... nice turn out ~ was very pleased

http://www.canada.com/globaltv/lethbridge/index.html

Hi All

http://medpot.net/forums//index.php?showtopic=59043

Today was a kick ass day from the work go! My partner and I prepared for the protest and to hear what the MP's had to say?

I am proud to announce the two protests here in Victoria went of without a hitch! MP Denise Savoie & MP Dr. Keith Martin spoke with uplifting words mixed with an inspiration that continued action to oppose bill C-26 as proposed will be their stance.

As will be see in the video link I have provided as part of the International Hempology 101 Society Team & the Buyer's Club of Canada who have done a great job in responding to the Nation wide initiative to counter Bill C-26 here are the links to pictures and video links. Cheers!

Jason Wilcox

CanNabis is the least of our problems’
By DAVE MABELL
Dec 18, 2007, 04:01

Email this article
Printer friendly page
A pro-marijuana group took its protest to Lethbridge streets Monday.
Warmly-dressed protesters rallied in front of MP Rick Casson’s office, after parading their signs through the city centre. They were opposing the Conservative government’s plans for compulsory jail terms for people selling street drugs.
Tamara Cartwright, spokesperson for more than a dozen who turned out for the city’s first pro-pot demonstration, said the planned law changes could make criminals of people like her who rely on marijuana for pain control.
“All this means is that hard-working Canadians that use a bit of weed will be sitting in jail rather than working,” she said. “This is not the solution.”
Speaking for the Southern Alberta Cannabis Club, she said public education and government regulation — like liquor — would be a better response than an American-style “war on drugs.”
“Addiction is a medical issue and should be treated as such,” Cartwright said. “Prohibition is a waste of our tax money.”
The Coaldale woman hoped to take that message to Casson, during a meeting scheduled later in the day. Demonstrations were planned Monday in front of scores of MPs’ offices across Canada, in response to Bill C-26 introduced late last month in Parliament.
The bill calls for a mandatory prison sentence when police can link a marijuana seller with organized crime, and a two-year minimum when anyone is found with a grow-op where more than 500 plants are being raised.
The maximum sentence for growing cannabis could double to 14 years, if Parliament passes the bill as tabled by Justice Minister Rob Nicholson.
“Cannabis is the least of our problems,” said Cartwright. Yet the Harper government seems determined to spend at extra $62.5 million tax dollars “on an American style drug war that has proven not to be successful.”
Protesters claimed while one-third of Canadians oppose full legalization and regulation of marijuana, the rest are moderately or strongly in favour. A recent SES Research poll, they said, found just eight per cent of Canadians who were interviewed remained in favour of criminal prohibition.

© Copyright by Lethbridge Herald.com
Top of Page

Hi All,

Yesterday was a kick ass day from the word go! My partner and I prepared for the protest and to hear what the two MP’s had to say? My wife was as excited as I to rise up at the first of many rallies to come in oppoution to Bill C-26.

I am proud to announce the two protests here in Victoria went of without a hitch! Moreover, it was the first protest I attended where not a single joint was lit. In addition MP Denise Savoie & MP Dr. Keith Martin spoke with uplifting words mixed with an inspiration of hope and a continued commitment to oppose bill C-26 as proposed.

As will be see in the video link I have provided as part of the International Hempology 101 Society Team & The Buyer’s Club of Canada who have done a great job in responding to the Nation wide initiative to counter Bill C-26 here in Victoria. Here are the Utube links for video. Pictures will be posted today.Cheers!


Jason Wilcox

Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WG7uAqam-Zk

Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufhp8SuYttU

NOTE: Part 1 and Part 2 can both also be reviewed at
http://medpot.net/forums//index.php?showtopic=59043 Cheers!

Caustic and I had a great day outside of Penny Priddy's office on 104th ave. in Surrey we were there from 12:00 until nearly 2:00pm without having anyone in the locked office to talk to.
(I did phone and talked to Penny`s assistant, Jennifer, a few days prior and was told that Ms.Priddy would not be in on the 17th, but would be voting against the bill)
Several people came by to see their m.p. without success.One lady said the people need to be able to use cannabis to be able to deal with the govt.
We were interviewed and photographed by the Surrey leader,the reporter was very supportive of our cause.
We handed out our litturature and spoke with everyone who came by
with only a few exceptions.
We proudly held our sign up for the passing traffic, it said
`PROHIBITION INCREASES DEMAND AND FUNDS ORGANIZED CRIME`

We had all good responses all around. Lots of honks, waves and nods. good conversations with the people passing by and several of them allowed us to take their pictures with our sign.

It was a good day all considered and best of all it didn`t rain.
pics will soon be posted.

Thanks to all who took part.
-----------------------------------------------------

B.C.`s no.1 cash crop--0 taxes collected, duh.