Illegal Drug Use in Canada

[Michael Bluth]

The simple truth is that we spend more money fighting the WoD than the cost of the drugs themselves. For half the WoD money spent in the US last year, they could have bought the entire production of poppies. Whoops, now there is a smart idea.

That's a pretty big assertion.

Remember this is Canada. How does your argument apply here.

To use your own words. "there would be a study you could cite to show that" the cost savings from banning alcohol would be as large as you claim. Care to cite that study?

[kuzadd]

can't respond to this as all the potential answers weren't offered.

cause where you asked this

What do you think the punishment for marijuna use should be?

A fine.

A criminal record.

prison.

None, it should be none.

There are no fines for tobacco or alcohol use, therefore there should be none for marijuana use

Edited October 5, 2007 by kuzadd

[geoffrey]

However...

Pot legalization will

-increase jobs

-remove the underground element

-taxes will be paid

The simple truth is that we spend more money fighting the WoD than the cost of the drugs themselves. For half the WoD money spent in the US last year, they could have bought the entire production of poppies. Whoops, now there is a smart idea.

The Netherland's experience hasn't shown any of that. Hookers have yet to pay taxes. Sex and drug tourism is out of control, and the locals are upset. Underground drug trafficking and prostitution still exists.

So what exactly does it accomplish besides the government subsidization of marijuana?

[jdobbin]

But the muckracking reporters would always bring up the fact that I brought it up.

You mean that you couldn't hold down your drugs? heh

[jdobbin]

Legalize marijuana, I don't see the point in keeping it illegal anymore.

As for harder drugs, those who use it shouldn't recieve jail time, however those that deal it should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

I mentioned a fine since it represents a evolution in the law.

I agree with you on dealing hard drugs.

[jdobbin]

I had to not submit my answer because no where did it say leave them alone.

My friend went to jail as a trafficker for handing someone their own cannabis cigarette back!!

I forgot to put "nothing" in as an option.

I'd go for decriminalization and allow for some possession. I don't know that Canada would be ready for outright legalization.

[jdobbin]

I couldnt answer your poll because, there was no fourth option to "What do you think the punishment for marijuna use should be>",

ie, no punishment. or why should there even be a punishment for what is in itself a victimless crime.

Should have added that option. Sorry.

[jdobbin]

Personally I think that any repeat offeder to using drugs should have a criminal record and if caught dealing Seven years for each time he is caught would be in order. By that I do not mean multiple counts are seperate, but for every seperate court trial. Therefore third offence you get 21 years. Yes I used used drug illicitly and no I do not think they are harmless even though some may not be as bad as others. It is like saying that we should make stealing just a fine and no record, because everyone has stolen something before, so lets just make it legal.

Why should only repeat offenders get the criminal record? At the moment, one arrest equals a criminal record. You are thinking it should be eased up to repeat offenders?

Edited October 5, 2007 by jdobbin

[geoffrey]

One argument to let first offenders off is it gives them a chance to get their life back in order or to seek treatment. Someone that repeatedly is caught using hard drugs or dealing any drugs has obviously not taken the care to fix up their life and has no business being a further drain on the publically funded health system.

[jdobbin]

One argument to let first offenders off is it gives them a chance to get their life back in order or to seek treatment. Someone that repeatedly is caught using hard drugs or dealing any drugs has obviously not taken the care to fix up their life and has no business being a further drain on the publically funded health system.

Well, that is not what the policy is. Enforcement of the pot law will mean a criminal record.

Have you ever used pot? Do you think it is a fair punishment to carry around with you a lifetime? Even with a pardon, you can be forbidden to travel anywhere outside of Canada the rest of your life.

[GostHacked]

I advocate a policy of, "Do all the drugs you want, but if it messes with your daily activities (work, family life ect) then no problem." The thing is many do not have the control over some drugs. And, yes some are very and quickly addictive. Personal restraint is a big thing as well. Treat it like most of us do to alcohol. Do not drink and drive, do not drive stoned, ect.

I have said here before that I am a daily pot smoker. I have also said her before that it does help with depression, anxiety, and many mental issues that many of us seem to have these days. I will say that I prefer pot over any other over the counter legaly perscribed drug. I did not like the feeling of being on them. They did help short term, but failed long term. Legalize it all. Let those who have no self control kill themselves for not having any common sense or enough self control to have fun with it, but be responsible at the same time. Or in case of many drugs, be responsible before you take the drugs.

I smoke, but it does not get in the way of me doing my job as a sysadmin at a warehouse. If it were legal, hell, I would just grow my own. Save money, and learn a thing or two about being a greenthumb.... heh hippy . But it does come down to self control, knowing your limits. I for one will not take cocaine, heroine, or crack. I am not woried about the criminal element so much as the fear of me getting addicted to it and loosing that control. I am sure I would have a fantastic time while doped up on cocain , crack, or heroine. I know I would get addicted to it in a hurry. Yes cocaine, heroine ,... hard drugs are more devestating to the human body over long term than let's say pot. Other than pot, what else is considered a soft drug? Has that classification ever been defined? They are all hard drugs? Anyways. Make it all legal, and let the chips fall where they may.

[bush_cheney2004]

Well, that is not what the policy is. Enforcement of the pot law will mean a criminal record.

Have you ever used pot? Do you think it is a fair punishment to carry around with you a lifetime? Even with a pardon, you can be forbidden to travel anywhere outside of Canada the rest of your life.

Don't do the crime if you can't do the time - "Beretta"

I never understood why dopers think their records should be expunged compared to other criminals, even non-violent ones.

[trex]

Don't do the crime if you can't do the time - "Beretta"

I never understood why dopers think their records should be expunged compared to other criminals, even non-violent ones.

some laws need to be reformed, not followed blindly if they are unjust. or where the punishment does not fit the crime.

some can still get away with it... i guess robert blake would know more about that

[Higgly]

I once ate a hash brownie back in colege but I did not digest......

Ha ha. Good one, Dancer.

[jdobbin]

some laws need to be reformed, not followed blindly if they are unjust. or where the punishment does not fit the crime.

There are quite a few anonymous posters who don't seem to want to touch the question of whether they tried an illegal drug.

I wonder what their thoughts on punishment would be then.

[Higgly]

Marijuana is less harmful than alcohol by virtue of the fact that it is not physically addictive. Marijuana is classified as a narcotic by politicians. Medical science does not call it a narcotic, but classifies it as an inebriant.

When the Chretien Liberals brought forward their decriminalization bill, the RCMP and the Association of Chiefs of Police were on side. I watched the hearings on CPAC and the RCMP guy testifying said so. Only the Police unions and Steve were against it. Steve of course was worried about what the neighbours would think. Silly Steve.

[jdobbin]

Steve of course was worried about what the neighbours would think. Silly Steve.

I wonder if Harper just tried marijuana. Has he ever been asked the question?

[Higgly]

I wonder if Harper just tried marijuana. Has he ever been asked the question?

If he didn't have kids, I'd wonder if he's ever tried sex.

[old_bold&cold]

Harper has most likely smoked pot at some time in his youth and I am almost sure his biker loving wife has taken a toke or two in her day as well. But what does that really have to do with this. I said I thought there should be a one time non-criminal event. After that the whole shebang should kick in. There are reasons for medicinal use, but that is not really the point now is it. The vast amjority of people who smoke pot do not have medical reasons to do so, and would not qualify for it to begin with. So today if you want to smoke pot you had better make sure of your source and also never let that source know who you really are. It that simple. Be extra cautious and you will not be caught, but if you light up in public you are going to et caught and only get one free pass. After that you will get all that the law wishes to give you. Seems more then reasonable to me. And before you all go running off saying that is not what Harper is proposing, remember it is only a draft of things for now and it can be changed if there was over whelming support for it. But this garbage about full legalization will never fly and it only hurst the discussions in most cases. Some of the posters are not only way out in the field but some are in the next stadium with their thoughts and opinions, at least those we can understand when posted.

[jdobbin]

Harper has most likely smoked pot at some time in his youth and I am almost sure his biker loving wife has taken a toke or two in her day as well. But what does that really have to do with this. I said I thought there should be a one time non-criminal event. After that the whole shebang should kick in.

What it has to do with it is that the present law gives you a criminal record from the get go.

[Guest coot]

Fans of Jimi Hendrix would beg to differ...

Fans of Jimi Hendrix would tell you that no one ever has died from smoking cannibis. Hendrix died from choking on his vomit after injesting prescription drugs and booze. It's extremely typical of the anti-cannibis lobby to make up all kinds of ridiculous lies in order to maintain organized crime's control of this product.

[Guest coot]

Be extra cautious and you will not be caught, but if you light up in public you are going to et caught and only get one free pass. After that you will get all that the law wishes to give you. Seems more then reasonable to me.

No. It's completely unreasonable because you are criminalizing something that is very difficult to even get sick from ingesting too much, never mind overdosing. It's completely unreasonable because you are proposing that it's anybody's business what a grown adult does in their own home when their behaviour has no negative effect on anyone else.

You try to make lame comparisons to stealing, but that, like pretty much all other crimes, involves a victim. A crime without a victim is a crime in itself.

[shavluk]

Agreed the public is not. But serious reduction to the equal of a parking ticket is cool by me, or as morris opined, Miss Vickies , but only the red pepper ones.

Both studies titles can be changed to read Cell Phone use doubles risk of fatal crashes, as it does according to studies I see at work.

As for the second one.....the title is enough , and should be for you too. It says "MAY" , and will I have no doubt it might be bad for thelungs, so is breathing smog and any number of plants in this country have poor air quality. Go in Dofasco, go into a metal plating facility. Far worse there.

Well lest see....

-reduced police actions against alcohols variabilties.

-alcoholism costs

-highway carnage (although most of those costs are Insurance Co 's)

However...

Pot legalization will

-increase jobs

-remove the underground element

-taxes will be paid

The simple truth is that we spend more money fighting the WoD than the cost of the drugs themselves. For half the WoD money spent in the US last year, they could have bought the entire production of poppies. Whoops, now there is a smart idea.

Very good !!

I totally agree.

You are correct and it makes so much more sense when you really think of the alternative.

[shavluk]

I mentioned a fine since it represents a evolution in the law.

I agree with you on dealing hard drugs.

What if your lawyer did cocaine lines with his wife every new years eve ,going on thirty years now?

???

The drug business is not in existence because of the addicts you see everyday on the street.

Not by a long shot.

The state has no business in the bedroom or any room in its citizens homes.

The Constitution of the united states will eventually save us all , thank god.

As the charter of rights seems full of holes.

[Visionseeker]

You really need to explain the alcohol ban as saving tax money. Prohibition would cost insane amounts of money, including the cost of jobs lost, criminal bootleggers. On and on and on.

And what do you think the war on drugs costs us? The best way to put the dealers out of business is to legalize and control. The sooner we do it, the sooner we can direct law enforcement and correction resources where they are most needed.