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.
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.
ReplyDeleteHi ridenrain
ReplyDeleteIn 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.
In the 5 years Harper has been in power and has declared crime one of his priorities, the CPC have increased a few sentences.
ReplyDeleteThat'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
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.
ReplyDeleteIs 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.
ReplyDeleteI 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.
"Simply appointing judges to ignore the problem isn't the way we change laws in this country."
ReplyDeleteAnd 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
"An Amendment To Imprison The Entire Population Of Saltspring Island"
ReplyDeleteThat'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.
How did that help the weekly shoot outs over drugs in Toronto, Vancouver, Winipeg, etc?
ReplyDeleteCan 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
"I can't find one."
ReplyDeleteOut of curiousity, wehre did you look?
Why the CBC, of course.
ReplyDeleteCan you find any?
A good primer:
http://thedependent.ca/featured/base-logic-part-one-introductions/
Oh Ridenrain. Sometimes I wonder why you bother. Do you enjoy being exposed as a fool?
ReplyDeleteHere'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.
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.
ReplyDeleteI'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.
So, because you cannot find any evidence to support your little "theory", it must be correct?
ReplyDeleteSometimes I wish I could be as self deluded as some of you conservatives. Must be nice to live in never never land.