Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 9/15/05 06:33 PM, Elfer wrote: The DEA is an American organisation, and they're trying to get a Canadian citizen extradited to America where he could face life in prison for something that isn't even a crime in Canada.

The RCMP has surely asked for the extradition of US citizens for things that are nto a crime in the US. Can you blame a law enforcement agency for not trying to do its job?

At 9/15/05 09:19 PM, JusticeofSarcasm wrote: The RCMP has surely asked for the extradition of US citizens for things that are nto a crime in the US. Can you blame a law enforcement agency for not trying to do its job?

When it's a life imprisonment term for something as stupid as seed sales, then yes, I can blame them.

Also, if you could provide an example or two of the times when the RCMP has asked for a US citizen, it'd be nice. It's not that I don't believe you, it's that I'm interested in the situations for the sake of comparative analysis.

Besides, in this case, it's not an average everyday Joe, this guy is the leader of a political party. In a way.

Sorry, but my google search turned up little on the RCMP asking, nto that it doesn't happen, just nothing has recieved as much attention as Emery. Extraditions happena ll the times.

How is this for you though. Two US teens were caught smuggling abotu 10 oz of pot between Guatamala and Belize. Theya re serving 10 years each in a Belize prison. Basically the cell is 10x10 for 3 people sleeping on the floor on cardboard.

That's pretty sucks.

However, on the other hand, what they were doing was illegal in both countries, and they weren't in the US at the time.

However, I think they should have been sent to the US to be tried and punished, or just exiled from the country or something.

erm yay?1!

At 9/15/05 12:48 AM, JusticeofSarcasm wrote: At teh time of desegregration the vast majority of people opposed it, yet the gov't went ahead anyways. There is only one poll that matters in our democratic system, the election. Often what is popular is not always right.

You got this all backwards. The government isn't protecting our civil rights here, actually the only analogy to this is that the government is actually impeding our civil rights by keeping marijuana illegal. When we legalize marijuana, it will go the way of segregation, prohibition of alcohol and same-sex marriages, it'll become accepted as part of our culture.

International politics is all about give and take. Assuming your are correct although I doubt any Canadian officials are making these comments, comprimise is something one must learn in the international world. If you always snub your nose in others faces then you will never get any favours, its abotu co-operation.

You obviously don't follow Canadian politics very well, not to have heard about the Canadian official who actually discussed our plans to decriminalize it with American officials about this. Officials have also made comments about the problems it will affect trade and slow down border crossings. I don't have a direct quote on me, but it's like common knowledge.

Besides lets apply your arguement that we should do whatever we wnat, the US be dammed to US actions. The US shoudl have gone to Iraq, just because teh world didnt want them to and the UN said no why should they not do as they wish. They are a soverign nation. Ok, how about this idea, the US people dont want our beef so why shoudl the US let in our mad cow. Keep the border closed. Get my drift.

Americans have gun laws that conflict with our laws and because of that, most gun crimes in Canada can be traced to a gun that was illegally smuggled into Canada from the United States. So if it wasn't for their lax gun laws, we'd see a reduction in crime. The U.S. has no problem with laws that affect our country in a negative way, we shouldn't have any problem with laws that affect theirs. Especially when marijuana doesn't affect society in a negative way, like guns do. IMO it will be a positive effect on society and many Americans would even believe we're doing them a favour.

Are your refering to carte blanch legal or decriminalized and medical use? Please provided a reliable unbiased source for this information (ie not the Pot party website or Joesgrowop.ca).

I'm talking regulating and taxing it. Medical use polls show like 84% of Canadians support it for that.

http://www.ctv.ca/se..7261/?hub=TopStories

So really the gov't is following international alw

The U.S. has defied international treaties, we didn't like it, but they did it anyway. I think it's time for Canada to do the same because I believe we are right in this case and we'd lead the way to ending this archaic law. This isn't like we're starting a war on a country, killing thousands of people. This is a law within our own country. It's not like the U.N. will go and start a war with Canada over it, chances are they won't say much about it.

Ok, maybe thi shas to do with the fact that the Republican party and the Canadian Alliance are both conservative parties. This means that their ideas will be the same, like abortion, gay marriage etc. It doesnt mean that we would be a mini-USA, we would be following the wishes the gov't the majority of Canadians voted for in the election. Its not because Stephen Harper is a the US's yuppie, its because the parties ahve the same background and support base, white christians. Do you expect a aprty whose base is christians to support gay marriage, abortion and other things that go against teh bible?

You're right to call them the Canadian Alliance because they're the ones who hijacked the Conservative party. The best the Conservatives in Canada can hope for is a disaster, like a Liberal scandal. Otherwise, they will be forever stuck with the shit end of the stick.

Canadians don't want the same disaster that Mulrony had on Canada. One example in that he made it so that we cannot sell our own oil to ourselves for a cheaper price. So we end up paying higher prices than Americans do. This is what Conservatives do, sell out Canada and agree with the U.S. no matter what their policy.

At 9/15/05 01:46 AM, _FLAGG wrote: And Fenrus has a point: I smoke pot, sure. I have a half finished bowl before me, this very minute. But, see, I'm not a little fucking child. I'm not still in middle-school. I don't have to smoke out in public, to prove anything. I've nothing to prove, at all.

Any kind of person that thinks they're a badass because they 'OMFG smoked in front of a cop' is a piece of shit that doesn't deserve the breath they draw into their lungs.

If you actually went to one of these pot rallies, you'd notice most of the people there are either in their 20s or older. Some of them very old men. We smoke it in front of the cops to prove that even the cops in Canada are starting to accept it now. They realize that it's not a threat to society and it would be more of a threat for them to arrest us for it.

The State should pass a movement to arrest anyone caught doing drugs in public...even if it's on 'National little-children-think-they're-cool-for-smo
king-pot day'.

Well that's why you live in a country that conducts military-type raids on rave parties and puts you away for 10 years to life for growing marijuana. Thankfully I live in country where we have the freedom to smoke pot in front of police during pot rallies and not get arrested. They wouldn't dare arrest us during that time and they'd probably be shunned by other police officers. I don't smoke pot in front of a cop at any other time, simply because there are some cops in Canada who follow the law by the book. So far I've never encountered them when I was caught the few times with marijuana. One cop even handed me the bag back and let me go on my way, after searching my car. What was he looking for? He was wondering if I had any other hard drugs like cocaine and said that he doesn't care enough about marijuana to arrest me for it.

That's my utopia, children.

...and that's my facist hell.

At 9/17/05 12:18 AM, BigBlueBalls wrote: You got this all backwards. The government isn't protecting our civil rights here, actually the only analogy to this is that the government is actually impeding our civil rights by keeping marijuana illegal. When we legalize marijuana, it will go the way of segregation, prohibition of alcohol and same-sex marriages, it'll become accepted as part of our culture.

Your joking, saying that legalizing pot will be an equally great civil rights trimpuh as getting rid of segregation or allowing same-sex marriage? And FYI, same-sex marriage may be legal, but its still not universaily accepted in the country.

You obviously don't follow Canadian politics very well, not to have heard about the Canadian official who actually discussed our plans to decriminalize it with American officials about this. Officials have also made comments about the problems it will affect trade and slow down border crossings. I don't have a direct quote on me, but it's like common knowledge.

You are wrong. It was not a Canadian offical as you so claimed who made this statement, it was Congressman Mark Souder (R). Any Canadian official saying this was probally refering to what this man said.

Americans have gun laws that conflict with our laws and because of that, most gun crimes in Canada can be traced to a gun that was illegally smuggled into Canada from the United States. So if it wasn't for their lax gun laws, we'd see a reduction in crime. The U.S. has no problem with laws that affect our country in a negative way, we shouldn't have any problem with laws that affect theirs. Especially when marijuana doesn't affect society in a negative way, like guns do. IMO it will be a positive effect on society and many Americans would even believe we're doing them a favour.

The gun may have come from the US, but the root of the crime is still in Canada. If they couldnt get a US gun they would get a Canadian gun on the black market. And want to know what the cause of most gun violence is? DRUGS!!!!!!!!

How does pot affect society? And how does it affect society in a posittive way since you claim it does not cause any negative affects on society.

I'm talking regulating and taxing it. Medical use polls show like 84% of Canadians support it for that.

http://www.ctv.ca/se..7261/?hub=TopStories

Medical pot is 84%, that doesn't mean 84% of people think you should be able to toke up whenever you want. And I will just ignore the fact your poll was funded by the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws. And gov't taxes medication, so even if people support decriminalizing low amounts of possession and taxing it its nto the same as people supporting it becomingthe next tobacco.

The U.S. has defied international treaties, we didn't like it, but they did it anyway. I think it's time for Canada to do the same because I believe we are right in this case and we'd lead the way to ending this archaic law. This isn't like we're starting a war on a country, killing thousands of people. This is a law within our own country. It's not like the U.N. will go and start a war with Canada over it, chances are they won't say much about it.

Well the UN did pass a motion to make leaglization of pot illegal under international law. And besides, because the US broke treaties that means we shoudl to? If I break you arm shoudl you be allowed to break my arm for it? Do two wrongs make a right? Did you not learn in kindergarden that just because someone breaks the rules and gets away with it doesn't mean that you can break the rules too.

You're right to call them the Canadian Alliance because they're the ones who hijacked the Conservative party. The best the Conservatives in Canada can hope for is a disaster, like a Liberal scandal. Otherwise, they will be forever stuck with the shit end of the stick.

No, the COnservatives chose to merge witht he Reform party, uniting the right. They didnt have to. And they wont get the shit end of the stick forever, power has always shifted between the Conservatives and Liberals, its the NDP who always gets the shit end.

Canadians don't want the same disaster that Mulrony had on Canada. One example in that he made it so that we cannot sell our own oil to ourselves for a cheaper price. So we end up paying higher prices than Americans do. This is what Conservatives do, sell out Canada and agree with the U.S. no matter what their policy.

Well I wouldnt say NAFTA was a disaster. It has had some benifits for Canada, and some draw backs, but like I said international relations is abotu compromise. I love how you expect the US should bend on some matters to meet our needs but we shoudlnt bend for the US caus eit means we loose our soverignty. If you want a favour you got to give out a favour. Its hwo it works.

At 9/15/05 06:33 PM, Elfer wrote: The DEA is an American organisation, and they're trying to get a Canadian citizen extradited to America where he could face life in prison for something that isn't even a crime in Canada.

Oh holy shit that totaly sucks. Well hell send me a petition and I'll sign it.

At 9/17/05 01:15 AM, JusticeofSarcasm wrote: The gun may have come from the US, but the root of the crime is still in Canada. If they couldnt get a US gun they would get a Canadian gun on the black market. And want to know what the cause of most gun violence is? DRUGS!!!!!!!!

Yes please enlighten me how marijuana causes gun violence :-/

Also, where are they going to get a Canadian gun on the black market? What are they going to buy, hunting rifles? We don't sell certain kinds of guns, they would be much more rare if they weren't being smuggled over our porous border.

How does pot affect society? And how does it affect society in a posittive way since you claim it does not cause any negative affects on society.

It affects society in a similar way of how alcohol does, except without the bar fights, wife beating, and alcohol poisoning (overdose). People will be happier that we can do it legally, without having to worry about police arresting us for possession. No longer will it lead people to buy it from criminals who would rather see you addicted to crack. Not that everyone who sells it, sells harder drugs, but there are many criminals who use marijuana as a lure and may even offer you "free samples" of cocaine as I have experienced myself. When it comes to medical ways, the positive results already speak for themselves.

As for negative ways, I can think of just one. It will have a limited problem with our overall health, but then again smoking 20 cigarettes a day is much worse than having the occasional joint. Even with that, there are other ways to injest marijuana, like eating it or using a vaporizor. So that's about it, it will be a minor health problem, no worse than eating McDonalds everyday or getting drunk on weekends. Can you think of any other negative affects other than that?

Medical pot is 84%, that doesn't mean 84% of people think you should be able to toke up whenever you want. And I will just ignore the fact your poll was funded by the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws. And gov't taxes medication, so even if people support decriminalizing low amounts of possession and taxing it its nto the same as people supporting it becomingthe next tobacco.

Can you show me a recent poll, like as in last year, that shows otherwise? That same organization has showed polls from previous years where less than 50% of Canadians support taxing and regulating marijuana. Each year that number has grown and this is the first year where that survey has shown 53% of Canadians support it. So it's only a matter of time now that poll starts to reflect our policies.

Well the UN did pass a motion to make leaglization of pot illegal under international law. And besides, because the US broke treaties that means we shoudl to? If I break you arm shoudl you be allowed to break my arm for it? Do two wrongs make a right? Did you not learn in kindergarden that just because someone breaks the rules and gets away with it doesn't mean that you can break the rules too.

Unless they are committing atrocities or violating human rights, the UN doesn't make much of a stink about it. Look at Holland, where their marijuana prohibition is virtually nil. We're not doing something here that is going to cause thousands of deaths, attacking another nation or building WMDs. Most countries in the U.N. have been already loosening their laws on marijuana, including Canada. I wouldn't doubt that if we did defy this treaty, that other countries would follow suit and the UN council would be forced to review it again.

No, the COnservatives chose to merge witht he Reform party, uniting the right. They didnt have to. And they wont get the shit end of the stick forever, power has always shifted between the Conservatives and Liberals, its the NDP who always gets the shit end.

The Reform Party was the Alliance. Now they are called the Progressive Conservatives, not the Canadian Alliance. My point was that you were correct in calling them the Canadian Alliance, since they have the same extreme right policies they did.

The Liberals have ruled for most of the last half of the 20th century. Everytime the Conservatives get in, it's a very very short run because they always find a way to fuck us over. After a while we forget that and something happens like a scandal and we vote them in again, only to learn the same lessons we last learned 13 years ago.

I'm an American, and I'm all for 100% legalization of soft drugs like shrooms and weed.

and unlike the liberals, I am also for deregulation of marijuana, and NOT taxing the shit out of it.

Being a libertarian means you can have your pot and smoke it too.

At 9/17/05 02:09 AM, BigBlueBalls wrote: The Liberals have ruled for most of the last half of the 20th century. Everytime the Conservatives get in, it's a very very short run because they always find a way to fuck us over.

Exactly. Why do I have to pay an extra seven bucks every time I spend a hundy?

The damned conservatives, that's why.

At 9/17/05 02:09 AM, BigBlueBalls wrote: Yes please enlighten me how marijuana causes gun violence :-/

Did I say pot, no I said drugs. The people who sell ti are crimnals. They use guns to rpotect their investments, whether it be their stash, their turf or their money.

Also, where are they going to get a Canadian gun on the black market? What are they going to buy, hunting rifles? We don't sell certain kinds of guns, they would be much more rare if they weren't being smuggled over our porous border.

You can buy hand guns on the black market. And automatics can come from many countries, not just the US. If the US is shut down they will buy their guns from another country.

It affects society in a similar way of how alcohol does, except without the bar fights, wife beating, and alcohol poisoning (overdose).

Yeah so things like driving under the influence? Does anyone see a problem with people driving while high? And dont give me that bullshit but they are too lazy to drive when high, or nobody drives high, think if this becomes legal its potentially goona be used more and since its not illegal people wont just be doing it in their basements, they will be doing it whenever they feel like it. so this issues can occur still.

People will be happier that we can do it legally, without having to worry about police arresting us for possession.

Lets demolish theft laws so peopel will be happier when they shoplift those jeans because the police wont come after them.

No longer will it lead people to buy it from criminals who would rather see you addicted to crack. Not that everyone who sells it, sells harder drugs, but there are many criminals who use marijuana as a lure and may even offer you "free samples" of cocaine as I have experienced myself.

I doubt thats how the majority of it is sold. And if it is then this just goes to prove the point that pot is a gateway drug in the minds of users and sellers, plus the fact that it is not just Mom and Pop operations, but criminal rings liek bikers or drug cartels putting this shit out, who clearly use guns.

When it comes to medical ways, the positive results already speak for themselves.

I will agree that it potential for medical use is great and we shoudl allow it to be used with a prescription.

As for negative ways, I can think of just one. It will have a limited problem with our overall health, but then again smoking 20 cigarettes a day is much worse than having the occasional joint.

But smoking a joint everyday is like smoking 20 cigarettes. And if it becomes legal it will be cheaper, and therefore people will us eit more often, perhaps even several joints a day.

Even with that, there are other ways to injest marijuana, like eating it or using a vaporizor. So that's about it, it will be a minor health problem, no worse than eating McDonalds everyday or getting drunk on weekends. Can you think of any other negative affects other than that?

Driving will be one, productivity of the economy could suffer if people are high during work, not to mention we dont really know all the long term health affects of excessive use.

Medical pot is 84%, that doesn't mean 84% of people think you should be able to toke up whenever you want. And I will just ignore the fact your poll was funded by the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws. And gov't taxes medication, so even if people support decriminalizing low amounts of possession and taxing it its nto the same as people supporting it becomingthe next tobacco.

Can you show me a recent poll, like as in last year, that shows otherwise? That same organization has showed polls from previous years where less than 50% of Canadians support taxing and regulating marijuana. Each year that number has grown and this is the first year where that survey has shown 53% of Canadians support it. So it's only a matter of time now that poll starts to reflect our policies.

Well the UN did pass a motion to make leaglization of pot illegal under international law. And besides, because the US broke treaties that means we shoudl to? If I break you arm shoudl you be allowed to break my arm for it? Do two wrongs make a right? Did you not learn in kindergarden that just because someone breaks the rules and gets away with it doesn't mean that you can break the rules too.

Unless they are committing atrocities or violating human rights, the UN doesn't make much of a stink about it. Look at Holland, where their marijuana prohibition is virtually nil. We're not doing something here that is going to cause thousands of deaths, attacking another nation or building WMDs. Most countries in the U.N. have been already loosening their laws on marijuana, including Canada. I wouldn't doubt that if we did defy this treaty, that other countries would follow suit and the UN council would be forced to review it again.

No, the COnservatives chose to merge witht he Reform party, uniting the right. They didnt have to. And they wont get the shit end of the stick forever, power has always shifted between the Conservatives and Liberals, its the NDP who always gets the shit end.

The Reform Party was the Alliance. Now they are called the Progressive Conservatives, not the Canadian Alliance. My point was that you were correct in calling them the Canadian Alliance, since they have the same extreme right policies they did.

The Liberals have ruled for most of the last half of the 20th century. Everytime the Conservatives get in, it's a very very short run because they always find a way to fuck us over. After a while we forget that and something happens like a scandal and we vote them in again, only to learn the same lessons we last learned 13 years ago.

There was a hempfest today in Boston.

Okay it wasn't anything near a cannabis liberation week it's just a stupid excuse to get stoned out of your mind.

Legalize weed!

At 9/17/05 09:38 PM, -Alex- wrote: There was a hempfest today in Boston.

Okay it wasn't anything near a cannabis liberation week it's just a stupid excuse to get stoned out of your mind.

Legalize weed!

no, its stupid and a waste of time, having a law against weed isn't stopping you now is it, if they legalized weed, you would have the shit taxed out of it so it's actually cheaper for it to be illegal

At 9/17/05 10:03 PM, fenrus1989 wrote: no, its stupid and a waste of time, having a law against weed isn't stopping you now is it, if they legalized weed, you would have the shit taxed out of it so it's actually cheaper for it to be illegal

Thats the stupidest thing I have ever heard. You could make hundreds of reason to keep weed illegal, but one of them isn't because it will be more expensive.

Marijuana would be a lot cheaper for a few reasons:

1. There will be a real industry therefore more pot will be made. The less rare something gets the cheaper it gets.
2. Theres no risk in selling/transporting it therefore the sellers probably won't charge as much.
3. It will be easier to find.
4. A lot more pot will be imported into your country if its legal, thereforemaking it cheaper.

alex please tell me in america, how much is a pack of ciggs

At 9/17/05 08:13 PM, JusticeofSarcasm wrote: Driving will be one, productivity of the economy could suffer if people are high during work, not to mention we dont really know all the long term health affects of excessive use.

So what you're saying is that alcohol should be an illegal substance?

At 9/17/05 10:13 PM, fenrus1989 wrote: alex please tell me in america, how much is a pack of ciggs

We're walking about weed.

Cigarettes are about 4-6 dollars a pack depending on quality.

I can get a gram of weed for 15 if I'm lucky.

Woah, hold on a sec people, hes not going to get life. He can possibly get life, but he wont, unless he gets the dumbest judge ever.

He can possibly get life because each transaction counts as narcotics selling, however, when it comes to things like that, almost any judge will make the sentences run concurrently, meaning he will only get the time for one sentence.

There is almost a 100% chance he wont serve more than one year.

Depends where he faces trial.

Some places in America are HARD FUCKING CORE on drug charges, so they might make him serve them consecuitvely.

That's why America has such a huge, bloated prison population, you know. War on drugs and all that.

At 9/17/05 11:01 PM, Elfer wrote: Depends where he faces trial.

Some places in America are HARD FUCKING CORE on drug charges, so they might make him serve them consecuitvely.

I doubt it. Many judges don't even run murder charges consecutively. It is commonly considered that if you commit a series of crimes all built into the same crime. Take for example a robbery, (B&E, theft, destruction of property), you will generally get a concurrent charge.

That's why America has such a huge, bloated prison population, you know. War on drugs and all that.

Because of consecutive terms? No, because drugs are illegal. Drug dealers don't get alot of time in prison as much as they constantly go back to prison.

At 9/17/05 11:08 PM, Jimsween wrote: I doubt it. Many judges don't even run murder charges consecutively. It is commonly considered that if you commit a series of crimes all built into the same crime. Take for example a robbery, (B&E, theft, destruction of property), you will generally get a concurrent charge.

Well, it does all kind of depend, since he was selling seeds, and selling them to various people around the country in various locations. Concurrent sentences vs. consecutive sentences all depends on what the sum of the crimes actually was, and whether it can really be determined to be one crime as a whole or multiple crimes.

Anyway, considering the circumstances, the judge would probably slap him for the max term of one count of vending seeds.

Don't know what that is in America/whatever state he'd be tried in, but knowing the drug policies there, I'd bet it's approximately a LOT.

Because of consecutive terms? No, because drugs are illegal. Drug dealers don't get alot of time in prison as much as they constantly go back to prison.

No, because they overuse jail terms for petty things such as possession.

At 9/17/05 10:33 PM, Elfer wrote:

At 9/17/05 08:13 PM, JusticeofSarcasm wrote: Driving will be one, productivity of the economy could suffer if people are high during work, not to mention we dont really know all the long term health affects of excessive use.

So what you're saying is that alcohol should be an illegal substance?

I was simply showing that pot use wont be as "innocent" as safe as people here are trying to make us believe, that it would only have a marginal impact on our health and no other problems.

BTW don't say well you support alcohol cause you drink it, why cant I support pot when I smoke it to me because I do not drink, at all. I go to the college pub and have ginger ale.

At 9/17/05 11:39 PM, JusticeofSarcasm wrote: BTW don't say well you support alcohol cause you drink it, why cant I support pot when I smoke it to me because I do not drink, at all. I go to the college pub and have ginger ale.

I don't drink alcohol either. That doesn't mean I don't think other people shouldn't be allowed ot drink it.

Same with pot. I've never used pot, probably never will, but I still think people should be able to if they want to.

As for productivity, businesses can easily send home or fire anybody who comes to work under the influence of alcohol, same would apply to marijuana.

As for driving, I don't have the URL right now, but there was a study performed that ended up showing the effects of marijuana on driving were negligible.

I'll try to find the link for you, but the upshot of the whole deal is that while you have reduced reaction times, it doesn't matter when you're only going three miles per hour.

Driving:
http://www.fcda.org/driving.htm

Lots of other stuff about marijuana, with about a jillion sources provided:
http://paranoia.lyca..ealth-mythology.html

Liberate the cannibis. It's being unjustly held against it's will in the evidence room! Sorry, I had to make a dumb comment.

And I say unto you...

At 9/18/05 08:12 PM, 0wnage_Incarnate wrote: And I say unto you...

No I am not. (DAMMIT!)

"Driving under the influence of any drug is generally discouraged, but studies have always indicated that marijuana (cannabis) has only a neglible effect on drivers who are experienced with its effects."

So if someone smokes up for the first time they'll probably end up killing someone.