Thursday, December 30, 2010

LPoC Tentatively Offers To Show Some Spine

Although the article is entitled "Conservative Crime Agenda Moves Forward", this piece from Xtra offers progressives a glimmer of hope:

Liberal justice critic Marlene Jennings says she is open to killing the bill at second reading but says the Liberals are looking at how the bill fits with other Conservative crime legislation.

That's right, the LPoC is contemplating not rolling over on Bill S-10, which would mandate mandatory prison terms for whipping up a plate of hash brownies or growing a half-dozen (6) pot plants. I'm not sure the Harper Tories have given a name to this bill, but one good one might be the "Lets Bust Gramma Hippy Act" or, alternatively, "An Amendment To Imprison The Entire Population Of Saltspring Island".

In any case, I interpret Ms. Jennings words as a cry for help and guidance. If enough noise is aimed at the right people, this trivial but profoundly stupid bill may yet die.

14 comments:

ridenrain said...

Guts would be to come out with a platform to actually change the laws. Adopt it as a policy for the party and let the voters decide.

Gayle said...

Hi ridenrain

In the 13 years they were in government, the LPC:

-created the sex offenders registry
-created the DNA databank
-Criminalized stalking
-rewrote the entire Narcotics legislation creating new categories of drug offences
-rewrote the entire youth justice legislation making it easier to sentence youths as adults and increasing the maximum youth penalties AND getting tougher on violent offences
-created new provisions allowing the police to monitor suspected and actual sex offenders even when said offender is not subject to any sentence
-enhanced victims rights by allowing them to present their statement in court to the judge prior to sentencing

In the 5 years Harper has been in power and has declared crime one of his priorities, the CPC have increased a few sentences.

Kev said...

In the 5 years Harper has been in power and has declared crime one of his priorities, the CPC have increased a few sentences.

That's because the Con leadership doesn't believe its own rhetoric and in the end that is all their law and order platform is, rhetoric useful in mollifying its far too easily mollified base

Rev.Paperboy said...

Gayle, let's not sell the CPC short here - they have some impressive accomplishments: They managed to scare the crap out of rural voters about violent crime in the cites, something that has been declining for several years. They tried hard to make sure the police had no mechanism to keep track of legally owned firearms and take guns away from people convicted for domestic assault or other offenses who were barred from owning firearms. They handed Marc Emery over to the U.S. government so that he could be jailed for a crime he supposedly committed in the U.S. without leaving Canada and to top it all off the cons have put aside money to build lots of new prisons for people who commit unreported crimes.

Gayle said...

"They managed to scare the crap out of rural voters about violent crime in the cites..." etc.

True, though they had some help from a media that sensationalized every crime like it was happening to everyone, every day.

The sad irony is that the people most likely to be victimized by sexual assault, assault, robbery, murder, break and enter etc are the same people who also are charged with crimes. Generally they are victims before they are criminals, though not always.

Middle class Canadians really are not at the same risk of being victimized as the poor and the working poor. However, ALL his crime "measures" are directed at the people who are least likely to be victimized.

ridenrain said...

Is it official LPC policy to decriminalize or legalize? Simply appointing judges to ignore the problem isn't the way we change laws in this country.

I believe the NDP has decriminalization in it's platform. Why dosen't the LPC find some guts, get off the fence and let Canadian voters decide.

Gayle said...

"Simply appointing judges to ignore the problem isn't the way we change laws in this country."

And pretending the facts are not what they really are is not the way to persuade people.

See my earlier post for how the LPC DID change the criminal laws in this country, while the CPC, well, didn't.

ha ha ha ha ha

Curtis said...

"An Amendment To Imprison The Entire Population Of Saltspring Island"

That's my first choice for the name of the bill.

I also like to suggest that some of the longtime residents of Saltspring Island invite dear Stevie, Toews, Day, Baird, MacKay and company to the Tuesday Market and feed them a few 'special' brownies while dressing them up in hemp shirts and hemp 'murses'. Then call in the RCMP. Bingo, bango, BONGo. Problem solved. Book 'em Dano.

ridenrain said...

How did that help the weekly shoot outs over drugs in Toronto, Vancouver, Winipeg, etc?

Can any of you show me an example of a Canadian charged for having less that 10 pot plants for their own use? I can't find one. All of them seem to involve huge grow ops with obvious links to organized crime. Even those examples usually never seen to result in jail time.

My point is that if no one is now being charged with growing their own pot now, what`s the point of changing the lawÉ

Gayle said...

"I can't find one."

Out of curiousity, wehre did you look?

ridenrain said...

Why the CBC, of course.
Can you find any?

A good primer:
http://thedependent.ca/featured/base-logic-part-one-introductions/

Gayle said...

Oh Ridenrain. Sometimes I wonder why you bother. Do you enjoy being exposed as a fool?

Here's the thing. Reporters who cover drug busts do not generally bother with busts of teensy tiny operations, such as the ones that involve only a few plants. Your interesting "story" notwithstanding.

Might I suggest doing your research in the court houses?

Thanks for the laugh though.

ridenrain said...

Reporters with a "progressive" agenda definately would do a whole series on some poor stoner who gets charged simply for growing his own plants though. Make it Gramdma Fitter, treating her glaucoma and that's award winning material in Canada.

I'd say the decades of Liberal appointed judges and their agenda have sent a clear message to the police that they shouldn't even bother enforcing this law any more.

Gayle said...

So, because you cannot find any evidence to support your little "theory", it must be correct?

Sometimes I wish I could be as self deluded as some of you conservatives. Must be nice to live in never never land.