questionall

As we face the prospect of new mandatory minimums in canada, which would include, 6 months for 1 marijuana plant, one has to wonder what is Harper thinking? As the Americans move toward real reform because of mounting pressure due to incarcerating these types of people , we go backward. The Americans, after having tried this "drug war" for over 30 years, are beginning to realize that spending 100's of billions to keep up this facade is pointless and has only resulted in filling the prisons . Even if you don't use marijuana, it dosen't seem responsible for a government, especially during a recession, to place that kind of a burden financially on the tax payer. These mandatory minimums were a complete and dismall failure in the U.S. creating the highest incarceration rates in the world. I'm pretty sure a responsible adult growing one plant is not a "trafficker" but will be labled as such. As a side note , there are no mandatory minimum sentences for child molestation, rape or murder. Guess Harpers ideolgy is at play again with no regard for the advice he's been given from scientists, economists, or crimimologists, who have voiced serious concern. It has never worked , it won't work and yet here we go. Why are the Liberals backing this bill?

Last year the American College of Physicians presented a position paper to the American government asking them to re-classify marijuana, Why? well , after 30 plus respected, government funded, "credible" studies, something quite astounding happened, the THC and other compounds found in marijuana was reducing cancerous tumors by as much as 50% in lung cancer, and stopping metastisis in a number of other cancers, however even this "repected" group of over 125,000 doctors cannot have access to what they have asked for which is research grade marijuana. Political ideology? you decide, since George Bush simply said, NO. This might not seem important to the legalization issue and the idea that the Prime Minister wants anyone who uses marijuana no matter what the amount, jailed, but it does show, that no amount of science is even considered, when it comes to this plant, that probably has more medicinal properties than we could have ever dreamed. As far as trafficking, is concerned, why is it that if you get pulled over in your car, or some fanatic neighbor knows you use marijuana and calls in an anonomous "tip" resulting in these warrants that trample your Charter Rights, if they find marijuana, and it can be as little as 5 or 10 grams, the charge always reads possession for the purpose of trafficking? They never have to see you sell marijuana to anyone. If someone smokes marijuana for their own personal use, it would not be unusual for that person to have more than a few joints, maybe they use it recreationally or maybe the use it as medicine, but it certainly does not prove they are trafficking. This is how this proposed bill gets dangerous, and the reason you will see many innocent, regular, taxpaying, non-violent citizens, go to jail. 1 plant, will be considered trafficking. The government will insinuate you are producing with the intent to sell. Absolutely not true in many cases. The real fact remains,, mandatory minimums caused such damage in America, that they have begun to repeal these laws. 100's of billions of dollars spent for nothing. The cartels are never the ones damaged from these types of laws, the American model DID NOT WORK . The propaganda machine doesn't work as well as it used to either, because more and more people are choosing to educate themselves, and as they learn more, the fear they once felt is no longer the deciding factor. The research is all easy to access and how you choose to view it is considered FREE WILL, 2 words I think sum up the reason, people who choose a plant that has never caused a death in it's history, to be avtively involved in stopping the cruel and unusual punishment, bills such as c-15 create. Oh, and as a side note, Harvard was pretty mystified when in 2006 and after studying regular marijuana users, they found that the ones who smoked marijuana, even those that smoked cigarettes as well, had a fraction of the rates of lung cancer as the ones who only smoked cigarettes. Take it up with Harvard if that poses a problem for you, don't shoot the messenger. This actually made the news a few months back, when the report suggested, there was no correlation between marijuana and cancer .