[medpot]

Winnipeg Free Press

Letters to the Editor


Senate amends bill to take out mandatory minimum sentences for growing pot



By: Bruce Cheadle, THE CANADIAN PRESS

3/12/2009 6:32 PM


OTTAWA - The Senate has altered a Conservative tough-on-crime bill to remove mandatory minimum sentences for people convicted of growing fewer than 200 pot plants.

The amendments to Bill C-15 by the Senate committee on legal and constitutional affairs were immediately denounced by Justice Minister Rob Nicholson as "very disappointing."

"The whole bill is about people who are trafficking in illegal drugs," said Nicholson.

But a news release from the Senate committee stated its amendments are designed to better target "the 'kingpins' or major players in the drug trade" while giving judges and prosecutors more discretion for lesser transgressions.

The changes would also avoid triggering long automatic mandatory prison terms for convicts who have minor drug offences in their past, said the committee.

The amendments must still be voted upon by the Senate as a whole.

Bill C-15 was passed in the elected House of Commons, where the current political dynamic has made opposition parties very cautious about critiquing the Harper government's tough-on-crime mantra.

But the Senate promised to give the legislation a more critical examination. A Senate inquiry headed by Conservative Pierre Claude Nolin recommended in 2002 that marijuana use for adults should be legalized.

The latest Senate committee said it heard testimony from government officials, law enforcement associations, legal groups, public health organizations and academics that convinced it amendments were needed.

Nicholson was among those who testified, and he stated the "proposals represent a tailored approach to mandatory penalties for serious drug offences." The new law, testified the justice minister, targets "those who profit off the vulnerabilities of those addicted to drugs."

However the Senate committee says it heard from witnesses who said the new law would actually induce drug kingpins to recruit more low-level and addicted dealers, who in turn would suffer the consequences of the mandatory minimums.

"There is a large body of research that points to both the lack of a deterrent effect for mandatory minimum sentences and the fact that they can lead to significant increases in the prison population, with little or no impact on public safety," Howard Sapers, the independent ombudsman for federal offenders, told the Senate committee.

Nicholson said Thursday the notion of mandatory minimum sentences is not a Conservative innovation.

"Most of mandatory sentences were not passed by this government, they were by the Liberals," he told reporters.

"But the bills that we have brought forward have all got proportional sentences and I think they're very appropriate."

Debating over the length of sentences for those convicted of growing between five and 200 cannabis plants for the purpose of trafficking is a far cry from the federal political debate of earlier this decade.

At the time of the 2002 Senate report, Nolin, the Conservative committee chairman, stated that: "Scientific evidence overwhelmingly indicates that cannabis is substantially less harmful than alcohol and should be treated not as a criminal issue but as a social and public health issue."

[medpot]

The Montreal Gazette

Letters to the Editor: letters@thegazette.canwest.com


Senators alter crime bill to go easier on pot growers


By Janice Tibbetts, Canwest News Service December 3, 2009 7:02 PM



A committee of the Liberal-dominated Senate has amended
a Conservative law-and-order bill, eliminating an element that
would automatically send marijuana growers to jail for at least
six months if they're caught with as few as five plants.
Photograph by: File Photo, CNS


OTTAWA — For the second time this fall, a committee of the Liberal-dominated Senate has amended a Conservative law-and-order bill, eliminating an element that would automatically send marijuana growers to jail for at least six months if they're caught with as few as five plants.

The committee altered the controversial bill Thursday to retain a judge's discretion when sentencing offenders convicted of growing fewer than 200 plants, putting the upper chamber on a collision course with Justice Minister Rob Nicholson.

Automatic terms for a variety of other drug-related crimes — for the first time in Canada — were kept intact.

Nicholson, however, seized on the committee's move to highlight divisions between the Liberals in the Senate and the House of Commons.

The drug bill sailed through the Commons earlier this year after the Liberals teamed up with the Conservatives, despite grumbling within Grit ranks that they were being told to support a bad bill so they wouldn't be accused of being soft on crime.

Nicholson called on Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff Thursday to "lean on these people" in the Senate and urge them to pass the bill in its original form.

The legal and constitutional affairs committee amendments will go to the Senate as a whole, which will begin debating the bill next week and then decide whether to pass the bill in its original or altered form.

The committee has also amended the bill to reaffirm the Criminal Code principle that the special circumstances of aboriginal offenders should be taken into account when sentencing.

A third amendment rewrites a provision that would automatically jail offenders convicted of a second drug offence, stating that the first offence must have been a serious one.

Liberal Senator Serge Joyal described the amendments as minor and he said no reasonable person could say that the committee "gutted" the bill.

Nicholson, who earlier this fall accused the Senate committee of gutting another crime bill, would only say Thursday that he is "disappointed" by the latest move.

The Liberals have accused the Conservatives of revelling in the Senate scrutiny because they can use it as a springboard to reinforce their tough-on-crime message and take aim at their Liberal opponents.

The committee had warned this fall that it would not rubber-stamp the legislation, which has drawn heavy criticism in public hearings in both the Commons and the Senate. Opponents have warned the bill, if passed, would flood jails and imprison drug addicts and young people rather than drug kingpins, who will continue to thrive, while small-time dealers are knocked out of commission.

The same Senate committee voted in October to dramatically alter a Conservative bill to eliminate judicial discretion to give offenders a two-for-one credit for time spent in pre-sentence custody, but the Senate as whole rejected the amendments and the bill was enshrined in law a few weeks later.


© Copyright © Canwest News Service

[papapuff]

Globe and Mail



Wednesday, December 9, 2009 11:49 AM


Is Liberal caucus discipline going to pot?


Jane Taber

George Baker is a Liberal Senator from Newfoundland blessed with the gift of oratory. Mischievous but serious about the work he does, Senator Baker is making life difficult for his leader, Michael Ignatieff. He is pushing amendments to a Conservative tough-on-crime bill aimed at drug traffickers.

Elected Liberals support the bill. Indeed, it passed through the House of Commons but its ride through the Senate chamber has not been as smooth. And that is because of Liberal senators, namely Mr. Baker.

The Senate is to vote on this legislation – Bill C-15 – later this afternoon; it is not clear how it will go although the Liberals do have a slight majority right now.

Senator Baker’s issue is with the mandatory minimum sentences in the original bill. He argued yesterday in a speech in the Red Chamber that they “take the discretion away from the judge in extreme cases. … We should not take away the discretion from the judge and place it in the hands of the Crown prosecutor.”

He also used Barack Obama’s reminiscences of his past drug use to back up his point, suggesting that the U.S. President, as a university student, could have landed himself in jail with mandatory minimum sentences.

Reading passages from President Obama’s biography, Senator Baker had to explain to his colleagues that “blow” meant cocaine and “reefer” meant marijuana and noted that the author now resides in the White House.

“It makes one wonder,” he said. And it makes one wonder where this could leave Mr. Ignatieff if the amendments to remove the mandatory minimum sentences for people convicted of growing fewer than 200 marijuana plants pass.

Justice Minister Rob Nicholson has said the Liberal Leader “should lean” on his Senators to pass the original bill.

But you can’t whip these Senators. Again, Mr. Ignatieff’s hold on his caucus will be in question.

(Photo: A B.C. pot farmer tends to his plants in Miracle Valley this spring. John Lehmann/The Globe and Mail)

[Kegan]

taber is a shameless shill for the tories. she makes me sick.

she always looks unkempt when i see her on tv, and her VOICE... she always sounds like she is about to burst in to laughter. she reminds me of sarah palin.....

she has a face for radio, and a voice for print

[papapuff]

Toronto Star

Senate votes to remove mandatory minimum sentences from Tory pot law


THE CANADIAN PRESS
Published On Wed Dec 9 2009

OTTAWA – The Senate has voted in favour of changing a Conservative crime bill that would have imposed a mandatory six-month minimum sentence on people convicted of growing as few as five pot plants.

By a vote of 49-44, the Liberal-dominated upper chamber agreed to amend Bill C-15 to give judges greater discretion in sentencing convictions for growing between five and 200 plants.

The amendments also provide aboriginal convicts with an exemption from the minimum sentences, require judges to explain why they are not imposing the suggested minimums, and add in a cost-benefit review of how the legislation is working after five years.

However, mandatory minimum sentences of nine months still remain in place if there are aggravating factors to the marijuana grow-op, such as endangering the health of a child or creating a public safety hazard.

The Conservative government has sharply criticized the Senate for tinkering with legislation that has already been passed by the elected House of Commons.

It is not clear what will become of the changes when the amended bill is sent back to the Commons, where it must again be ratified before it can become law.

[papapuff]

Vancouver Sun



Senators alter crime bill to go easier on pot growers


By Janice Tibbetts, Canwest News Service

December 9, 2009 6:02 PM



The Senate has watered down a Conservative law-and-order bill by eliminating a requirement
for marijuana growers who cultivate as few as five plants to to serve mandatory six-month jail
terms. A final Senate vote on the proposed legislation — which would impose automatic prison
and jail time for a variety of drug crimes for the first time in Canada — is scheduled for
Thursday.Photograph by: file, Getty images


OTTAWA — The Liberal-dominated Senate has watered down a Conservative law-and-order bill by eliminating a requirement for marijuana growers who cultivate as few as five plants to to serve mandatory six-month jail terms.

By a 49-43 margin, the upper chamber accepted a proposal from a Senate committee on Wednesday to raise the bar to more than 201 plants, rather than stick with the original number adopted by the House of Commons earlier this year.

A final Senate vote on the proposed legislation — which would impose automatic prison and jail time for a variety of drug crimes for the first time in Canada — is scheduled for Thursday.

The controversial bill would remove discretion for judges to impose sentences as they see fit, adding to more than two dozen mandatory minimum sentences that already exist in the Criminal Code for such things as murder and gun-related crimes.

The Senate also amended the bill to stipulate that the special circumstances of aboriginal offenders, who are over-represented in the prison population, must be taken into account by judges when imposing drug sentence.

Senator Joan Fraser, the head of the legal and constitutional affairs committee, told the Senate during a debate on the proposed amendments that many of the 62 witnesses who appeared at public hearings on the bill said that the penalty for five pot plants was "excessively severe" and that it could lead to over-incarceration of small-time street dealers and growers.

"It is quite likely to be the amount one had for individual consumption, not for trafficking," she said.

Police and the majority of provinces, however, support the bill that passed in the Commons in June, noted Conservative Senator John Wallace, who said that raising the bar to more than 201 plants is too lenient.

"Two hundred plants is a huge number," said Wallace. "This is a major issue. On an annual basis, the wholesale value of that would be in the $350,000 range. This is serious stuff."

Justice Minister Rob Nicholson blasted the Senate, saying their amendments "open the door to drug traffickers and people in the grow-op business to continue to evade prison time for their crimes."

Pamela Stephens, a spokeswoman for Nicholson, said that permitting growers to escape jail time for cultivating more than five plants could create "loopholes" that would allow large-scale operations to thrive, such as enabling growers to have 50 plants in 10 places.

When Nicholson introduced his bill last February, he proposed automatic jail terms for growing even one plant. The Commons justice committee raised the number to five in the spring.

The amended bill, if it passes in the Senate as expected, goes back to the House of Commons for a final vote, where MPs could reject the amendments and restore their original proposals.

The drug bill sailed through the Commons in June after the Liberals teamed up with the Conservatives, despite grumbling within Grit ranks that they were being told to support a bad bill so they wouldn't be accused of being soft on crime.

The proposed legislation would impose one-year mandatory jail time for marijuana dealing, when it is linked to organized crime or a weapon is involved. The sentence would be increased to two years for dealing drugs such as cocaine, heroin or methamphetamine to young people, or pushing drugs near a school or other places frequented by youths.

Those provisions were untouched by the Senate.

The bill has been widely lambasted by witnesses who appeared at public hearings in the Senate and the House of Commons.

American critics warned minimum mandatory sentences for drug crimes have flooded U.S. prisons in the last 25 years, with a disproportionate effect on drug addicts, the poor, the young, blacks and other minorities.

The Conservatives have defended their bill as a necessary tool to fight organized crime by sending the message that drug criminals will be treated harshly.

Opponents counter that the proposed legislation will fill jails with drug addicts rather than drug kingpins, who will continue to thrive, while small-time dealers are knocked out of commission.

[papapuff]

Vancouver Sun



Vancouver police fear watering down of pot growing law


By Gerry Bellett, Vancouver Sun
December 9, 2009 6:02 PM



A marijuana-growing operation in busted in Chilliwack.
Photograph by: handout, .


VANCOUVER -- A Senate amendment that would soften a bill designed to impose mandatory sentences on people illegally growing marijuana will likely result in the proliferation of smaller growing operations, says the head of the Vancouver police department’s anti-gang and drug section.

Insp. Brad Desmarais said the department opposes an amendment of Bill C-15 by the Senate's committee on legal and constitutional affairs that removed the section imposing a minimum sentence of nine months on anyone found guilty of growing fewer than 200 plants.

The Liberal-dominated Senate has watered down the bill by eliminating a requirement for marijuana growers who cultivate as few as five plants to to serve mandatory six-month jail terms.

By a 49-43 margin, the upper chamber accepted a proposal from a Senate committee on Wednesday to raise the bar to more than 201 plants, rather than stick with the original number adopted by the House of Commons earlier this year.

“The proposed legislation was designed to make it tougher for marijuana grow operators by imposing a minimum sentence for anyone convicted of running grow-ops of 200 plants or fewer. The Senate has amended the bill to remove this provision and the VPD can't support that,” said Desmarais.

Desmarais said the motive behind all illegal marijuana growing operations is profit.

“If they remove the minimum sentencing for grow ops under 200 plants then they will, without a doubt, create a huge industry where we will see a proliferation of grows with 199 plants because there will be less penalty,” he said.

“Criminals constantly operate on a cost/benefit analysis — 199 plants will still constitute a viable commercial option. I suspect if this amendment passes we will see even more manifestly unsafe grows occurring.

“It doesn’t matter if there is a wiring malfunction in a 200-plant grow or in a 2,000-plant grow — houses still burn down, people could die and property will be destroyed. The only difference is there will be more [albeit smaller] grows.

“There should be public safety issues addressed — grows and labs in houses where children are present should also attract a minimum sentence, regardless of size,” said Desmarais.

The committee altered the controversial bill last Thursday, allowing a judge discretion when sentencing offenders convicted of growing fewer than 200 plants, something Justice Minister Rob Nicholson wanted to prevent.

Other provisions of the bill that would allow automatic sentences for a variety of drug-related convictions remained intact.

Desmarais said the creation of smaller but more numerous growing operations will be an administrative and enforcement headache for police as it already requires many hours of work to produce the evidence sufficient for a search warrant.

“This will only further deplete our already overtaxed, resource-starved department. If we have to prove someone has a 1,000 grow operation broken down into five separate units it will be a huge undertaking,” he said.

Desmarais said the Senate seemed to be thinking that the under-200 growing operation was just a “mom and pop operation” but an examination of the profits from such an enterprise shows it to be anything but.

“If someone was to run a 33-plant operation for a year — so 99 plants — that would generate $178,000 tax-free dollars and that would be wholesale value. So it’s not mom and pop,” he said.

On Wednesday, Vancouver police raided a growing operation in the industrial area of Kent Street where they found less than 200 plants being grown using “four enormous propane tanks,” he said.

“Operations like this pose a significant risk even though this one wasn't in a residential area,” he said.

gbellett@vancouversun.com

[noddy420]

MrSeabc

C-15 Update

[OttCanuk]

Not that I'm happy with this bill, but at least Nicholson and the cops are pissed off. That always gives me a small feeling of satisfaction. Who knows what will happen now, but at least Harper is not happy today. I wonder who he's going to bully first?

Don

[Afka]

What a clearly unbiased report by Global news...

[pablofunk]

won't anybody think of the children!

[S^N]

The Nanaimo Daily News


Pot law proposal criticized

Depending on who you ask mandatory sentence is either too lax or too tough


Paul Walton, The Daily News
Published: Thursday, December 10, 2009


The Senate may have raised the threshold for mandatory sentencing for pot growers to 201 plants, but two local advocates of the drug say it remains a needless and harsh escalation of the law.

While the minority Conservative government had sought mandatory jail terms for growers with as few as five plants, the Senate on Wednesday rejected that proposal and settled on 201 plants.

The bill is aimed at the stranglehold that organized crime appears to have on the marijuana trade in Canada, and "B.C. bud" commands hefty prices in the United States.

Police have been pushing for stiffer sentences and in Nanaimo, Mounties estimate there are between 250 and 300 illegal growing operations. Const. Gary O'Brien said that about 35% of those are linked with organized crime. The average size of a pot-growing operation, he said, is between 200 and 250 plants.

But a Nanaimo Pam Edgar, who smokes marijuana to cope with her Multiple Sclerosis, said mandatory jail sentences are going to hurt people who grow the drug for medical reasons but do not have a Health Canada certificate.

"Mandatory minimums are an across-the-board policy. There are people who are going to be stepped on big time," said Edgar.

She admitted that 201 plants could indicate a for-profit operation, but said some grow-ops can be that big to supply either compassion circles or a group of palliative care patients.

O'Brien said that grow-ops around the size of 200 plants are using increasingly sophisticated technology. He said it appears that some also are being wired by professional electricians.

Another trend police are seeing is the migration toward rural properties for indoor growing. O'Brien said they are seeing an increasing number in the Cedar area.

Leonard Melman, who once ran as a candidate for the B.C. Marijuana Party, said the issue evades the principle of rights.

"The principle is whether adults have the right to do what they want with their own bodies as long as they don't interfere with others," said Melman.

He and Edgar said their answer is to end the sanctions against marijuana. Melman said the illegality is what pushes the profit.

"Legalize it, that's the simple answer," said Edgar.

But O'Brien said marijuana remains at the centre of drug abuse.

"Many of the people our members are dealing with on the streets have said they first started smoking marijuana," he said.


PWalton@nanaimodailynews.com


WHAT DO YOU THINK?

We want to hear from you. Send comments on this story to

letters@nanaimodailynews.com. Letters must include your first and last names, your hometown and a daytime phone number.



© The Daily News (Nanaimo) 2009

[S^N]

The Nanaimo Daily News


Editorial


Senate saved us from heavy-handed Tories


The Daily News
Published: Thursday, December 10, 2009


Canada's Senate made a sensible amendment Wednesday to a politically motivated bill that would have seen people who grew as few as five marijuana plants serve a mandatory six-month jail term.

Accepting a proposal from a Liberal-dominated Senate committee, by a 49-43 margin the Senate watered down the proposed legislation by raising the number of marijuana plants grown to more than 201 plants, which would see judges use their own discretion in sentencing those found guilty of growing fewer than 200 pot plants.

Judicial discretion is a keystone to our justice system. Judges across the country hear the cases prosecutors make before them as well as hearing the reasons those growing marijuana doing so. There is no one-size-fits-all punishment that would encompass a judge's reasons for the sentence they impose on a convicted marijuana grower.

Undoubtedly, some growers are involved in organized crime and dealing illegal drugs. A judge may not accept that a person who was growing as many as 200 plants was doing so for his or her own use.

Just as surely, some people growing five to 10 plants are not selling their harvests and a judge can hear the reasons why they feel compelled to grow their own pot.

The bottom line is the judge in the community hears both sides of the story and imposes a sentence they see fit. While a sentence for 10 plants may not be as harsh as a penalty for 50, given the circumstances under the current laws, a judge can weigh the factors surrounding a convicted person's growing of marijuana.

The law, as proposed by the Conservative government, was nothing more than a political ploy to make them look tough on crime. What's even worse is that Liberal MPs in the House of Commons voted in favour of this mandatory-minimum chicanery for fear that they would look soft on crime.

Did none of our honourable members examine what has happened south of us?

American critics of mandatory-minimum sentences warned MPs and Senators that these type of sentences have swamped prisons south of the border and the majority of those sentenced have not been drug dealers or those involved in organized crime. A disproportionate number of those now serving long prison terms in the U.S. for minor drug violations are addicts, the poor, the young and minorities.

Was there really a problem that new legislation needed to address?

Perhaps the Liberal-dominated Senate's recommendation of 201 plants as being the threshold is too liberal but five plants is ridiculously punitive for those who grow marijuana for their own use, whether recreational or medicinal.

That's what a judge can determine in a court of law and that's what judicial discretion is meant for.

The sole intent of this proposed legislation is to appeal to the Conservative government's base and look as if it's being tough on crime. If the government wants to run roughshod over decades of common law, so be it. At least the optics are favourable to its supporters.

In the big picture, how much harm do small-time marijuana growers do?

If the government wants to demonstrate that it's tough on crime, perhaps it should focus on other matters. Two crimes that have Canadians concerned far more than growing marijuana are child pornography and identity theft. While it's difficult to compare the harm of one crime with another, there are far more pressing matters that should be dealt with before focusing on pot growers.

In a show of political theatrics on Wednesday, Justice Minister Rob Nicholson expressed contempt for the Senate's decision to amend his proposed legislation.

The decision opens "the door to drug traffickers and people in the grow-op business to continue to evade prison time," he said.

How would he know?

Cases have yet to come before an impartial judge who won't be swayed by politics.



© The Daily News (Nanaimo) 2009

[kushyman]

No we are NOT saved from the Tories

There are so many loop holes in this law that anyone can get nailed...

It looks like they have snuck [non thc containing] seeds into schedule 1

theycan give you up to life for some seeds if they want.

Bubble bags will get you a jail sentence too


I URGE EVERYONE TO EMAIL IGNATIEF NOW

Tell him to get his Party to vote NO on this travesty of Injustice.

He must know that the only ones he has hopes for votes from are people who do NOT want this Law

It has gone back to Parliament now is the last chance.

Please , every email may help.

thankyou

[The Crusader]

What's Iggy's E-mail?

[papapuff]

It's on his web site

Michael Ignatieff

[The Crusader]

Thanks papapuff, I just sent one off to Mr. Ignatieff

[Truth]

Abbotsford Times

Letters to the Editor: editorial@abbotsfordtimes.com


Senators 'dead wrong' on passive bill C-15: Fast


Rafe Arnott, The Times
Published: Friday, December 11, 2009


The possible legislative removal of mandatory minimum prison sentences for people caught running marijuana grow-ops of 200 plants or less will not cause a proliferation of 199-plant grows, according to police.

Conservative MP for Abbotsford Ed Fast has accused the Liberal-dominated senate of being "soft on crime," after tough provisions to the Conservative government's drug-crime bill C-15 have been "watered down" as the legislation passes through the governing body.

The Conservative government's legislation was written to impose minimum sentences of six months to three years in prison for those operating grow-ops of 200 plants or less and criminals who produce and traffic drugs where aggravating factors are present.

Those factors include the involvement of violence or weapons, drugs being sold to children or in areas frequented by children, and where organized crime is involved.

"What they're saying is that commercial grow-ops of 200 plants don't pose a risk to our communities," said Fast.

"They are dead wrong. Abbotsford residents will be furious when they realize that unelected and unaccountable Liberal senators have completely disregarded the drug-related violence and gang activity that has infected Fraser Valley communities."

Const. Paul Dhillon with the Abbotsford Police Drug Squad said criminals and organized crime sell drugs to make money, and it won't matter to them if there is a mandatory prison sentence for 200 plants or 50 plants.

"Grow-ops are motivated by money, greed . . . [criminals] will continue with business as usual in my opinion," said Dhillon.

"If you tell me [the government] legislates 200 plants and above and you go to jail, will guys start staying at 199? I don't think so."

Dhillon conceded that grow-ops are almost exclusively the domain of organized crime.

Starting a grow is expensive and you need connections to move the weed.

"I don't think they [senators] know how far gone it is, and the severity or the impact it has in this area.

"People get killed for marijuana all the time, drive-by shootings, it's big money," said Dhillon.




© Abbotsford Times 2009

[Truth]

The Globe and Mail


Senate vote to ease sentencing ‘disturbs' drug police



A medicinal marijuana farmer tends to his pot plants
inside his grow up at his home in Miracle Valley, B.C.
on May 15, 2009. John Lehmann/The Globe and Mail

Move would remove mandatory minimum sentences for
running a grow-op with 200 or fewer marijuana plants

Ian Bailey

Vancouver — From Thursday's Globe and Mail
Published on Wednesday, Dec. 09, 2009 11:42PM EST

Last updated on Friday, Dec. 11, 2009 2:39AM EST


A senior Vancouver police officer says he is “disturbed” that Liberal senators have amended a Conservative crime bill, removing the requirement for mandatory minimum sentences for some drug crimes, including running a grow-op with 200 or fewer marijuana plants.

“If the senators would like to hear our perspective, we would be delighted to provide it,” Inspector Brad Desmarais, a veteran anti-gang and drug-section leader, told reporters during a news conference yesterday after the vote on Bill C-15.

The Vancouver department was the first in Canada this week to criticize the pending amendments, including the removal of a six-month mandatory minimum sentence for offenders caught with 200 or fewer plants and the exemption of aboriginal offenders from mandatory minimum sentences.

That unease deepened yesterday with a 49-44 vote in the Senate to proceed with the amendments.

“We felt the legislation, as written, was sound. We liked it, and we're disturbed it has been changed,” said Insp. Desmarais.

Police Chief Jim Chu said yesterday that Insp. Desmarais is speaking for drug-squad officers who are worried.

“The officers in the front lines who experience the dangers of these operations were very concerned,” he said.

With Chief Chu's blessing, Insp. Desmarais issued a statement saying the amendment would encourage a proliferation of grow-ops designed to hold 200 or fewer plants in order to avoid a mandatory minimum sentence.

Yesterday, he was more blunt.

Speaking to Senate critics of the bill, he said, “My understanding is that their focus, their concern was that the police would be targeting mom-and-pop and starving-college-student grows in the bedroom.

“But trust me, a 200-plant grow is a viable commercial enterprise that makes a lot of easy, tax-free money.”

Insp. Desmarais said the force would welcome an opportunity to speak to lawmakers. The amended bill now will be sent back to the Commons.

“Irrespective of party affiliation, we would genuinely appreciate an opportunity to provide our side of this issue so they may have a more balanced approach in their deliberations,” he said.

One reason for the force's disappointment, he said, is that representatives of the department met earlier this year with federal Justice Minister Rob Nicholson and were satisfied he was in sync with their perspectives.

There was no chance to participate in the latest round of debate, he said.

“We were saddened to see the Senate change it when we weren't given an opportunity to speak with the Senate,” he said.

Several other city police departments across Canada contacted by The Globe and Mail yesterday said they were not in a position to comment because, in many cases, drug-squad officers were not available.

One exception was the Halifax police department.

“We would support Vancouver's position and we would view these changes as providing loopholes for criminals to use to avoid sentencing,” Constable Brian Palmeter, speaking for the Halifax department, said before the vote.

“Whether it's 199 plants or 200, these are sophisticated dealers [whose] sole purpose is to cultivate a product they can sell to 13, 14, 15, 16-year-old kids, and certainly what this seems to do is provide the loophole that is going to possibly cause these grow-ops to be spread out amongst more neighbourhoods so criminals can remain under that magic number, which is going to mean an increased risk to various communities. We would follow, support Vancouver's position on the amendments.”

[Truth]

The Winnipeg Sun

Letters to the Editor: letters@wpgsun.com


MP decries move to 'two-tiered' legal system


By JASON HALSTEAD, WINNIPEG SUN

Last Updated: 11th December 2009, 4:55am


Winnipeg South MP Rod Bruinooge says he's disgusted with Liberal amendments made by the Senate to exclude aboriginal offenders from a bill that established mandatory minimum sentences for drug offences.

Bill C-15 had proposed a person found guilty of trafficking who had previously been convicted of a drug-related offence within the prior decade would receive a minimum prison sentence of one year while someone with a prior record who was convicted of growing five or more marijuana plants would receive six months of mandatory jail time.

Liberal senators, aided by four independents, passed an amendment Wednesday upping the pot plant number to 200 while handing judges discretion at applying the mandatory minimum to aboriginal offenders. The mandatory minimum prison terms would also now only be handed out if offenders were previously sentenced to a year or more in jail.

Bruinooge, who chairs the Harper government's aboriginal caucus, said mandatory minimum exemptions for aboriginal offenders could create a two-tiered legal system.

"It's definitely the wrong approach to justice to create, essentially, two different levels of sentencing based on race," Bruinooge said. "As an aboriginal person, I just see it as offensive."

In a prepared statement, Liberal Senator Charlie Watt said the amendment provides the same treatment for aboriginal offenders as already exists. He said the amendment ensures similar consideration will be given when sentencing aboriginal people under the Act.

"There are places in Canada where aboriginals make up 80% of the inmate population of prisons," Watt wrote. "These numbers demonstrate that cultural sensitivity and a judge's discretion, which are already being applied under the Criminal Code, are certainly not a 'get-out-of-jail-free card.'"

Treasury Board President Vic Toews said the Senate amendments gut the Tory legislation.

"We're very concerned about the Liberal senators removing a substantive part of the bill," said Toews, who was particularly upset about the amendment to up the number of pot plants to which the mandatory sentence would apply.

"What this does in fact is ensure that drug dealers and grow-op operators could continue to go on as before. This is a serious concern, especially in urban areas where these grow-ops take place in residential premises and are a danger to firefighters and police."

Toews said he will encourage Justice Minister Rob Nicholson to reinstate the bill to what Parliament originally passed and send it back to the Senate.

jason.halstead@sunmedia.ca

[Truth]

Abbotsford News

Letter to Editor


Senate attacked for weakening pot bill


Published: December 11, 2009 11:00 AM
Updated: December 11, 2009 11:41 AM

Rochelle BAKER

Abbotsford News


Senate amendments this week to Bill C-15, particularly one that waters down mandatory minimum sentences for smaller marijuana growers, are being targeted by critics.

The changes mean someone has to be caught with 200 marijuana plants before they have to serve a minimum six-month sentence.

Originally, the bill called for a minimum sentence at five or more plants.

Darryl Plecas, criminologist at the University of the Fraser Valley, testified before the senate committee as they considered the bill, designed to hand out stiffer penalties to drug dealers.

“What the senate has done through its recent amendment has basically rendered the legislation useless,” Plecas said.

Setting the limit at 200 plants will mean a large number of people running “commercial” grows will go unpunished.

“That number is slightly over the average size of a grow. That means 50 per cent of those with grows will be exempt from (the minimum sentences),” he said.

Additionally, pot growers will simply cultivate crops that have just under 200 plants.

Such grows, if managing four harvests a year, could still potentially reap close to 800 pounds of pot a year.

“It’s ridiculous. That’s hardly an amount for personal or medical use,” he said.

It’s also a mistake to focus penalties around the number of plants in a grow-op, said Plecas.

Sophisticated lighting equipment allows for a much higher yield, allowing commercial or criminal enterprises to produce large amounts of drugs with fewer plants.

The senate amendments were intended to avoid unduly harsh sentences for small time traffickers or those who grow marijuana for personal use.

A mandatory minimum would still apply to offenders caught with 200 or fewer plants if a judge deemed there were aggravating factors, such as endangering a child or causing a public safety hazard.

Abbotsford Conservative MP Ed Fast opposed changes to the bill, saying Liberal senators have given drug dealers and gangs an early Christmas present.

“What they’re saying is that commercial grow-ops of 200 plants don’t pose a risk to our communities,” said Fast, adding Abbotsford voters will be outraged that unelected senators have disregarded the drug-related gang violence plaguing the Fraser Valley.

[Truth]

The Toronto Star

EDITORIAL

Rethink crime bill


Published On Fri Dec 11 2009


With appropriate "sober second thought," the Senate has amended a crime bill that would have imposed mandatory minimum prison sentences on people convicted of growing as few as five marijuana plants. By voting this week to return some discretion to judges in drug cases, the senators have chosen to base changes in our criminal laws on evidence rather than politics.

Bill C-15 was originally passed by the House of Commons with the support of both the governing Conservatives and the opposition Liberals – the latter because they were worried about being painted as "soft on crime" by the former.

If the bill passes third reading in the Senate as amended – which is still uncertain – it will be sent back to the House of Commons for reconsideration. The Liberals should take the opportunity to rethink their position and support the Senate's amendments, which improve a deeply flawed law.

During committee hearings, the government was not able to offer any evidence to support its claims that Bill C-15 would make our streets safer. There is, however, a great deal of evidence to the contrary. The Americans have pioneered mandatory minimum sentences as a deterrent to crime. Does anyone think their streets are safer? Tougher sentencing laws in the United States have led to an astronomical increase in incarceration of drug dealers and addicts, at great cost to the American taxpayer. As a result, some American states are taking steps to repeal these laws, just as Prime Minister Stephen Harper's government is trying to bring them to Canada.

For Harper and the Conservatives, crime is a wedge issue that can be mined for political gain. And, unfortunately, the Liberals have been cowed into submission. In the end, Canadians won't thank either party for laws that don't reduce crime but stuff prisons with non-violent offenders at enormous expense to the taxpayer.

[Truth]

The Edmonton Sun

Letters to the Editor: mailbag@edmsun.com


COLUMN


More grow-ops in wake of crime bill changes?


By ANDREW HANON, Edmonton Sun

Last Updated: 11th December 2009, 6:33pm



In this file photo, RCMP Corporal Wayne Oakes looks over
some of the several thousand rounds of ammunition and
firearms that were discovered when the joint forces RCMP
and Edmonton Police Service Green Team served a search
warrant on a rural property in Lamont County. These are
among the items routinely discovered and interdicted in
major grow-op busts.
(DAVID BLOOM/ QMI AGENCY FILE)


When told about the Liberal-dominated Senate’s revisions to the government’s latest tough-on-crime bill, the former drug dealer howled with laughter.

“They wanna WHAT?” he said incredulously. “It’s like they’re encouraging grow-ops on reserves. It’s so crazy, it’s almost like a set-up.”

The Harper Tories are furious with the Senate’s changes to Bill C-15, which they say weakens it to the point of uselessness.

But some members of Alberta’s aboriginal communities fear the revisions would allow organized crime to exploit impoverished, desperate people living on reserves, by paying them to grow weed.

“It will be like the Taliban and the opium trade in Afghanistan,” said the former dealer.

Bill C-15 was supposed to impose mandatory minimum sentences on people who grow marijuana. The Tories wanted everyone convicted of growing more than five pot plants to get at least six months.

But this week the Liberal-dominated Senate amended the bill, raising the threshold to 200 plants and adding several exceptions.

Among those exempted from mandatory minimum sentences are aboriginal people.

“That would really open the door for people to come up here and take advantage of us. It’s crazy,” said Dwight Gladue, a leader among the Lubicon Cree in Little Buffalo, 300 km north of Edmonton.

Little Buffalo is a tiny, secluded community just off a major highway. It’s out of the way, but easily accessible.

“We don’t have a problem with grow-ops now, but this could really make us vulnerable,” he said.

Len Untereiner agreed. The head of the Edmonton-based Spirit Keeper Youth Society said, “this is just opening it up to create more victims. And many of our communities have suffered enough already.”

Under the Liberal amendments, there’s nothing preventing a judge from imposing harsh sentences on native pot farmers, but, Untereiner said, their underlying message is disturbing.

“As a First Nations person, I’m insulted by this. The law should apply to everybody, regardless of race, creed or colour.”

Untereiner said that if the Liberal Senators are worried about disproportionate numbers of natives in jail, they should be pushing for more social programs to keep them from getting into trouble with the law in the first place, not giving them lighter penalties after they commit crimes.

Edmonton police Sgt. Tony Simioni, who’s on the board of the Canadian Police Association, called the suggestion that groups of people should be treated differently under the law “very paternalistic. I just don’t like it on principle.”

Edmonton St. Albert Tory MP Brent Rathgeber, who sits on the government’s justice committee, said the Liberal amendments “not only diminish the effectiveness (of Bill C-15), they create a whole array of unanticipated problems. It’s going to encourage the development of this industry among First Nations communities.”

He doubts such provisions are acceptable under the constitution.

The bill will come back to the Commons when it resumes sitting in January. From there, it will either be passed, or sent back to the justice committee for more revisions.

“I have a real problem with the unaccountable and unelected Senate doing this type of damage to what I think was very, very well drafted and well thought out piece of legislation,” Rathgeber said.

andrew.hanon@sunmedia.ca

[Truth]

CNW Group - News Release

Fantino Supports New Crime Bill, but Urges Reconsideration of Amendments - Bill C-15


ORILLIA, ON, Dec. 12 /CNW/ - Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) Commissioner Julian Fantino supports the federal government's new crime bill, but has added his voice to a growing group of police officials and others who are concerned about recent amendments to Bill C15 in the Senate.

"Bill C15 contains a number of positive measures that will help police services and the entire criminal justice system to keep offenders off the street. However, I am urging all Parliamentarians to reconsider the amendments made to Bill C15 in the Senate regarding mandatory penalties for drug trafficking. These amendments will weaken deterrence and without effective deterrence, drug traffickers will continue to flout the law."

Fantino added that the illegal cultivation of marihuana, and associated violence, has reached epidemic proportions in Ontario, paying huge profits to criminals who currently face relatively minor penalties if caught.

Some of the amendments to Bill C15 passed by the Senate include:

- Raising the minimum number of marijuana plants cultivated from five to 200 for the mandatory sentence of six months in jail to be imposed. - Bill C15 would have imposed a mandatory minimum one-year sentence on anyone convicted of drug trafficking who had been convicted of a prior drug offence in the last ten years. The Senate amendment would only impose the mandatory sentence on anyone who had already served a one- year prison sentence for a prior drug-related conviction in the last ten years.

"Illicit drugs, particularly marihuana, continue to be a scourge in society and an ever-increasing threat to the safety of Ontario residents and communities," stated Fantino. Marihuana grow operations account for approximately 60 percent of the OPP Drug Enforcement Unit's (DEU) workload.

In October of this year, the OPP released the results of its Marihuana Enforcement Program. From January to September 2009, the OPP DEU of the Organized Crime Enforcement Bureau investigated 422 indoor/outdoor grow operations and seized and destroyed 202,788 marihuana plants.

At the media conference that was held to publicize the results, Commissioner Fantino issued a warning about the increasing threat to public and police officer safety posed by the expansion of marihuana cultivation in Ontario. He described how police are facing an alarming increase in the number of loaded weapons, booby traps, cameras and other security devices discovered this year that are being used by growers to ward off 'pot pirates' and police.

In one case, some All Terrain Vehicle enthusiasts in the Minden area encountered armed individuals who abducted, pistol-whipped and shot at them. Investigating police seized over 1800 pounds of marihuana bud in duffle bags.

In the past five years, OPP DEU officers have seized over 2,700 weapons during these drug investigations. These weapons pose a significant safety threat not just to police but also to the unsuspecting public who inadvertently come across these grow ops while utilizing the same outdoor spaces for recreational activities. Over this same period, the OPP DEU has dismantled 2,783 marihuana grow operations that has resulted in a staggering total value of over $1.18-billion dollars of marihuana being seizing and destroyed.

OPP investigators have well-documented evidence which shows the involvement of international organized crime in marihuana cultivation. A vast majority of the marihuana grown in Ontario is exported to the United States. The proceeds are then converted into cocaine, cash or guns and brought back into Ontario to support criminal enterprises. That safety threat has been recognized and documented by US law enforcement and government authorities.

"Make no mistake, marihuana grow operations generate millions of dollars in profits for organized crime and as such they will go to any extreme to protect this criminal venture, using violence as a tool of their trade," said Fantino. "The threat and the cost to the citizens of Ontario are real and the OPP will remain committed to the enforcement of all legal remedies for this very real and deadly illicit criminal activity."

For more information on this issue, including a backgrounder on the OPP DEU and the OPP Asset Forfeiture Unit, or to view/download photos and video of marihuana grow-ops and OPP eradication, or to view a summary of the OPP Wage Uphill Battle Against Marihuana Grow-Ops media conference of October 28, 2009, go to http://www.opp.ca/media/DES/.


To view the US Department of Justice National Drug Threat Assessment 2009, go to www.usdoj.gov/ndic

For further information: Inspector Dave Ross, Deputy Director, OPP Corporate Communications Bureau, (705) 329-6874

[medpot]

When Bill C-15 recently passed, one of our members said in an other post;

"And you thought I was being pessimistic Marc??? FUCK!!!!!!!!!"

Well my friend, Bill C-15 may have passed, but it's still not enacted by our Parliament yet.

It surely didn't pass the way both Harper's Reformist Conservatives and Canadian Police wanted it to be - and that's a good thing!

THANKS to ALL the efforts of our devoted activists and understanding Senators with their help in amending this unfair Bill!

More than 200 plants for a mandatory minimum sentence was surely a silver lining in a very dark cloud.

My message to "HARPER" and "FANTINO" is the following!



More to come!


Marc

[Miranda]

Quote

"Make no mistake, marihuana grow operations generate millions of dollars in profits for organized crime and as such they will go to any extreme to protect this criminal venture, using violence as a tool of their trade," said Fantino.

Make no mistake, police drug enforcement operations generate millions of dollars in profits for government and as such they will go to any extreme to protect this criminal venture, using violence as a tool of their trade.



Though not overwhelming it has been a victory for all campaigning against this bill as evidenced by the amendments and the fury that this has provoked with Tories.

This session has closed however we should keep up the flood of letters, faxes, emails, etc. to both MP's & Senaotrs as it appears a change in balance of party domination will be affecting the Senate in January.

[OttCanuk]

Hi Miranda. Could you clarify this for me?

Thanks

Don

Quote

This session has closed however we should keep up the flood of letters, faxes, emails, etc. to both MP's & Senaotrs as it appears a change in balance of party domination will be affecting the Senate in January.

[Miranda]

OttCanuk, on Dec 13 2009, 11:56 AM, said:

Hi Miranda. Could you clarify this for me?

Thanks
Don

Upcoming retirements
Eight Senators will reach the mandatory retirement age of 75 before the end of 2011. They are:

1.Jerry Grafstein, January 2, 2010, Liberal (Trudeau) - Ontario
2.Wilbert Keon, May 17, 2010, Conservative (Mulroney) - Ontario
3.Peter Stollery, November 29, 2010, Liberal (Trudeau) - Ontario
4.Jean Lapointe, December 6, 2010, Liberal (Chrétien) - Quebec
5.William H. Rompkey, May 13, 2011, Liberal (Chrétien) - Newfoundland and Labrador
6.Lucie Pépin, September 7, 2011, Liberal, (Chrétien) - Quebec
7.Lowell Murray, September 26, 2011, Progressive Conservative (Clark) - Ontario
8.Tommy Banks, December 17, 2011, Liberal (Chrétien) - Alberta

Barring the death, resignation, or change in partisan affiliation of any Senator – or the employment of Section 26 of the Constitution Act, 1867 – the earliest a Conservative majority could be attained would be December 6, 2010 with the retirement of Liberal Jean Lapointe. The earliest a Conservative plurality can be attained is January 2, 2010 with the retirement of Jerry Grafstein, if all vacancies are filled by that date with Conservative appointees.

[Afka]

Wow, we've never needed an election this bad.

Minority Liberals, no matter how stupid and interchangeable with the Tories they are, would be a better situation.

[medpot]

The Winnipeg Sun

Letters to the Editor: letters@wpgsun.com


EDITORIAL


'Two-tiered' justice for sure


By PAUL RUTHERFORD

Last Updated: 13th December 2009, 3:28am


The hot Canadian debate over "two-tiered" health care has -- thanks to Canada's unelected and unaccountable Senate -- been suddenly replaced by a hot debate over "two-tiered" justice.

That's what Winnipeg South MP Rod Bruinooge is calling amendments the Senate has proposed for a crime bill currently before them.

The amendments introduced Wednesday have outraged the Conservatives and their supporters.

They've once again accused the Senate of "gutting" a major crime bill -- this one dealing with mandatory minimums.

Bill C-15 had proposed a person found guilty of trafficking who had previously been convicted of a drug-related offence within the prior decade would receive a minimum prison sentence of one year while someone with a prior record who was convicted of growing five or more marijuana plants would receive six months of mandatory jail time. But Liberal senators, backed by four independents, passed an amendment upping the pot plant number to 200 while handing judges discretion at applying the mandatory minimum to aboriginal offenders.

Say what? Sounds likes two sets of rules to us, no matter what the Senate says.

"It's definitely the wrong approach to justice to create, essentially, two different levels of sentencing based on race. As an aboriginal person, I just see it as offensive," Bruinooge told the Sun.

Canadians remain outraged every time an unelected body like the Senate tinkers around with legislation intended to make the justice system tougher. The gloves are off now on the issue as a senator is fighting back. Liberal Senator Charlie Watt says it's all rubbish. He says Bruinooge is out of his tree. He argues in a letter to the Sun that it doesn't exempt aboriginal offenders at all. All the amendments do Watt says, is gives judges the "discretion" to decide whether a mandatory minimum is appropriate.

"The language in this amendment is modeled after existing Criminal Code provisions ... obviously cultural sensitivity and a judge's discretion have not led to a "free pass." Hence I do not expect this to be the result of my amendment."

But does this "discretionary" power have to be written in the Bill? Judges use discretion all the time. They don't need to be prodded to do it.

And why single out aboriginal criminals?

Sorry Mr. Senator, we say rubbish to you.

To most intelligent people this is nothing more than treating aboriginals softer when it comes to justice. These changes in the Bill means there are two sets of rules. And no matter how you spin it, the end result screams "two-tier justice."

Bruinooge has it right.

[medpot]

Truth, on Dec 12 2009, 11:33 AM, said:

Rethink crime bill

The Toronto Star

Letter

Crime bill ideal for gangsters


Re:Rethink crime bill,

Editorial, Dec. 11

Imposing mandatory minimum sentences will do nothing at all to deter the gangsters who grow pot, but it will do much to deter the mom 'n' pop growers. The government is merely pandering to the myopic, misinformed, punishment-happy voters who believe that only more prohibition can save us from the problems caused by prohibition.

Bill C-15 is a gangster-subsidization bill in that it will scare off the little guys and leave more business for gangsters. The gangs will then have more competition, which means more violence and bloodshed. Then future governments will use the inevitable increase in crime as justification for more draconian laws, more money and power for cops, and more money for jails.

Russell Barth, Nepean

[medpot]

Coast Reporter (B.C.)

Letters to the Editor


Editorial

One step forward, two steps back


December 11,2009

Ian Jacques/Editor

Law enforcement officers have a tough job. Just when you think they have been given enhanced tools to do their jobs better and get more criminal convictions, more jail time for the guilty, more drugs and weapons off our streets, some politicians change the rules and make things more difficult.

We’re referring to a decision by the Liberal-dominated Senate, who on Wednesday watered down a Conservative law-and-order bill, which was introduced earlier this year. The senators, in their infinite wisdom, eliminated a requirement for marijuana growers who grow as few as five plants to serve mandatory six-month jail terms. By a vote of 49-43, the Senate committee proposed to raise the bar to more than 201 plants, rather than stick with the number proposed by the Conservative government, and adopted in the House of Commons.

After a good deal of work by our politicians and co-operation, something that is quite rare in Ottawa these days, a tough bill that would see small-time growers and dealers get some significant jail time is quashed in a matter of seconds by the Senate. Does this make any sense? Why would the Senate choose to do this? Are they trying to undermine the Conservative government and do some bidding for their Liberal party friends? It would appear so from where we are sitting. What other plausible reason would they have to vote to weaken this bill? If anything the Senate should have voted to strengthen it.

This vote isn’t sitting too well with police officers.

The Vancouver Police Department held an impromptu media conference Wednesday afternoon denouncing the decision. A VPD spokesperson figures that now the small-time dealers, many of whom have taken up shop here on the Sunshine Coast, will take their 200-plus plant operations and scale them down into four or five smaller operations, thus avoiding the threat of jail time if they are caught.

The Street Crew unit of the Sunshine Coast RCMP is very active taking down big and small marijuana grow operations. If the watered-down bill does pass, it means that most of the work done by our local detachment will be for naught. The small-time growers will get a slap on the wrist, might not serve any jail time and will be back on the street setting up their next operation.

No wonder the public has lost so much faith in our political system. It’s just one step forward and two steps back.

[medpot]

The Calgary Sun

Letters to the Editor: callet@calgarysun.com


Crime bill exemption raises fears of Native exploitation


By ANDREW HANON

Last Updated: 14th December 2009, 2:14am


EDMONTON -- When told about the Liberal-dominated Senate's revisions to the government's latest tough-on-crime bill, the former drug dealer howled with laughter.

"They wanna WHAT?" he said incredulously. "It's like they're encouraging grow-ops on reserves. It's so crazy; it's almost like a setup."

The Harper Tories are furious with the Senate's changes to Bill C-15, which they say weakens it to the point of uselessness.

But some members of Alberta's Native communities fear the revisions will allow organized crime to exploit impoverished, desperate people living on reserves, by paying them to grow weed.

"It will be like the Taliban and the opium trade in Afghanistan," said the former dealer.

Bill C-15 was supposed to impose mandatory minimum sentences on people who grow marijuana.

The Tories wanted everyone convicted of growing more than five pot plants to get at least six months.

But this week, the Liberal-dominated Senate amended the bill, raising the threshold to 200 plants and adding several exceptions. Among those exempted from mandatory minimum sentences are aboriginal people.

"That would really open the door for people to come up here and take advantage of us. It's crazy," said Dwight Gladue, a leader among the Lubicon Cree in Little Buffalo, 300 km northwest of Edmonton.

Little Buffalo is a tiny, secluded community just off a major highway.

"We don't have a problem with grow-ops now, but this could really make us vulnerable," he said.

Len Untereiner agreed.

The head of the Edmonton-based Spirit Keeper Youth Society said, "This is just opening it up to create more victims. And many of our communities have suffered enough already."

Under the Liberal amendments, there's nothing preventing a judge from imposing harsh sentences on native pot farmers, but, Untereiner said, their underlying message is disturbing.

"As a First Nations person, I'm insulted by this. The law should apply to everybody, regardless of race, creed or colour."

Untereiner said that if the Liberal senators are worried about disproportionate numbers of natives in jail, they should be pushing for more social programs to keep them from getting into trouble with the law in the first place.

Edmonton police Sgt. Tony Simioni, who's on the board of the Canadian Police Association, called the suggestion that groups of people should be treated differently under the law "very paternalistic. I just don't like it on principle."

Alberta Tory MP Brent Rathgeber, who sits on the government's justice committee, said the Liberal amendments "not only diminish the effectiveness (of Bill C-15), they create a whole array of unanticipated problems.

"It's going to encourage the development of this industry among First Nations communities." He doubts such provisions are acceptable under the Constitution.

The bill will come back to the Commons when it resumes sitting in January. From there, it will either be passed, or sent back for more revisions.

[medpot]

Truth, on Dec 12 2009, 06:19 AM, said:

MP decries move to 'two-tiered' legal system

The Winnipeg Sun

Letters to the Editor: letters@wpgsun.com


Letter

NOT A 'FREE PASS'


Re: 'MP decries move to two-tiered legal system,' Dec. 11.

My amendment to Bill C-15 does not exempt aboriginal offenders.

To suggest this is untrue.

It provides a judge with the ability to decide whether a mandatory minimum is appropriate. A judge can still give a mandatory minimum sentence to an aboriginal offender under this amendment. If a judge doesn't impose it, they are required to explain why.

The amendment recognizes that aboriginal offenders don't have the same access to drug courts and drug treatment programs.

The language in this amendment is modelled after existing Criminal Code provisions. Aboriginals are currently convicted at nine times the rate of non-aboriginals. Obviously, cultural sensitivity and a judge's discretion have not led to a "free pass". Hence I do not expect this to be the result of my amendment.

SENATOR CHARLIE WATT

OTTAWA

Sounds like two-tier justice.

[Miranda]

Am I wrong to think that this should be spun the other way?

Senators should be outraged by government wasting their time on a bill that includes punishment for having/growing the very substance they said in 2002 should be legalized. Who is NOT listening?????

Senate Committee recommends legalization of cannabis
OTTAWA, September 4, 2002 - The Senate Special Committee on Illegal Drugs today released its final report on cannabis. In an exhaustive and comprehensive two-year study of public policy related to marijuana, the Special Committee found that the drug should be legalized.

http://www.parl.gc.ca/37/1/parlbus/commbus...e/04sep02-e.htm

The concensus among the Canadian people is for legaliztion and as taxpayers we've footed the bill each time this has been debated or reviewed. While the economy is suffering, health care is limping along, jobs are lost, participating in a war that has drained the military budget, children are abused, global warming, etc. etc...do we really want any more of our money spent on chasing pot growers/users ?

Who is NOT listening?????

[medpot]

The Vancouver Sun

Letters to the Editor: sunletters@vancouversun.com


Senate softens bill to require jail time for even small-time pot growers


By Janice Tibbetts, Canwest News Service December 14, 2009 3:20 PM



Liberal senators, with the help of independents, voted to raise
the bar so that marijuana growers would have to be caught
with at least 201 plants to garner the automatic jail term of
six months.
Photograph by: Ian Lindsay, Vancouver Sun


OTTAWA — The Liberal-dominated Senate has passed a scaled-back version of a Conservative drug bill, sending it back to the House of Commons for MPs to decide whether to reject the upper chamber's amendment eliminating a requirement for pot growers to serve jail time for cultivating as few as five plants.

Liberal senators, with the help of independents, voted to raise the bar so that marijuana growers would have to be caught with at least 201 plants to garner the automatic jail term of six months.

The controversial bill would remove discretion for judges to impose sentences as they see fit on a variety of drug-related crimes, adding to more than two dozen mandatory minimum sentences that already exist in the Criminal Code for such things as murder and gun-related crimes.

It was one of the only times that the Senate has amended a Harper government law-and-order bill.

Earlier this fall, a Senate committee dramatically altered another major piece of justice legislation that banned a judicial practice of giving offenders a two-for-one credit for time already spent in custody. The amendments, however, were voted down by the Senate as a whole.

Justice Minister Rob Nicholson blasted the Senate last week, saying its amendments to his drug legislation "open the door to drug traffickers and people in the grow-op business to continue to evade prison time for their crimes."

Senator Joan Fraser, the head of the legal and constitutional affairs committee, said during Sente debate that many of the 62 witnesses who appeared at public hearings on the bill believed that the penalty for five pot plants was "excessively severe" and that it could lead to over-incarceration of small-time street dealers and growers.

"It is quite likely to be the amount one had for individual consumption, not for trafficking," she said.

Police and the majority of provinces, however, support the bill that passed in the Commons in June, noted Conservative Senator John Wallace, who said that raising the bar to more than 201 plants is too lenient.

"Two hundred plants is a huge number," said Wallace. "This is a major issue. On an annual basis, the wholesale value of that would be in the $350,000 range."

When Nicholson introduced his bill last February, he proposed automatic jail terms for growing even one plant, but the Commons justice committee raised the threshold to five.

The Senate also amended the bill to instruct judges during sentencing to take into account the special circumstances of aboriginals, who are over-represented in the prison population.

The drug bill easily passed in the Commons in June after the Liberals teamed up with the Conservatives, despite grumbling within Grit ranks that they were being told to support a bad bill so they wouldn't be accused of being soft on crime.

The House can now restore the bill to its original form and return it to the Senate once again.

The proposed legislation would impose one-year mandatory jail time for marijuana dealing, when it is linked to organized crime or a weapon is involved.

The sentence would be increased to two years for dealing such drugs as cocaine, heroin or methamphetamine to young people, or pushing drugs near a school or other places frequented by youths.

Those provisions were untouched by the Senate.

© Copyright © Canwest News Service

[medpot]

The Winnipeg Sun

Letters to the Editor: letters@wpgsun.com


What's their plan?

Does pro-criminal lobby want to legalize drugs?


By TOM BRODBECK

Last Updated: 13th December 2009, 9:47am


Listening to pro-criminal groups like the John Howard Society, you'd think the Harper government's proposed crackdown on those who traffic illicit drugs is nothing more than an ideological exercise designed to appeal to the knee-jerk masses.

The federal Tories are proposing mandatory minimum sentences for repeat drug traffickers who commit serious drug offences in a bill that is currently being gutted by Liberal senators in the Red Room.

Bill C-15 is aimed at some of the more egregious drug crimes, including traffickers tied to criminal organizations and those who use weapons and violence in the commission of crimes.

Discretion

It sets out mandatory minimums of six months to three years, depending on the circumstances.

Groups like the John Howard Society and some Liberal politicians suggest these are draconian measures that don't work. They compare it to American-style justice that only serves to make matters worse.

One of their chief arguments is that it takes discretion away from the courts, leaving judges powerless to find more appropriate sentences that will result in offenders changing their ways and reintegrating into society.

They're wrong. If they actually read the bill, they would know that for repeat drug traffickers who want to change their ways and become law-abiding members of society, there are alternatives in the bill that allow them to do so.

The John Howard Society doesn't like to tell you about that part of the bill because it ruins their story.

Under Bill C-15, courts have the option of not imposing the mandatory minimum if the offender "successfully completes a drug treatment court program or a treatment program under subsection 720(2) of the Criminal Code that is approved by a province."

Those programs are designed to help those who meet certain eligibility criteria to tackle their addictions problems and who want to become law-abiding citizens.

So the proposed law is not the inflexible, draconian approach groups like the John Howard Society suggest.

If you want to change your ways and beat your addictions, there are options for you to avoid a minimum sentence. If you don't, and want to remain committed to a life of crime, the courts have to lock you up.

I don't know how any fair-minded, logical person could quarrel with that.

Instead, Craig Jones -- the executive director of the John Howard Society -- said during a Nov. 25 submission to a senate committee reviewing the bill that not only do minimum sentences not work, drug prohibition doesn't work either.

In his submission, Jones said Canada's prohibition on illicit drugs has been a dismal failure and using sanctions under the criminal code to prevent that prohibition is a "bankrupt" policy.

I asked him on my blog Raise a Little Hell what his alternative was to the prohibition of illicit drugs. He wouldn't answer the question. The only alternative to the prohibition of illicit and dangerous drugs like crystal meth and crack cocaine is legalization of those drugs.

Demented

Is that what groups like the John Howard are suggesting? We don't know because when asked that question, they refuse to explain.

Drug trafficking offences for illicit drugs such as crystal meth are on the rise in Canada. The number of youth accused of drug offences in Canada has doubled over the past decade.

To suggest governments do nothing about that or worse, legalize extremely dangerous drugs like crystal meth is not only misguided, it's somewhat demented.

For more, visit Brodbeck's blog Raise a Little Hell at winnipegsun.com. Reach Tom at 632-2742 or by e-mail at tom.brodbeck@sunmedia.ca.

[S^N]

The Times Colonist


Comment


Senate smarter on crime


Times Colonist December 15, 2009


Nothing frightens politicians these days like the risk of being seen as -- shudder -- soft on crime. That's the only explanation for Liberal MPs' support earlier this year for a Conservative bill that would impose a mandatory minimum sentence of six months for someone caught growing as few as five marijuana plants.

Fortunately, senators don't face the same pressures. The Senate passed an amended version of the crime bill yesterday. It left the mandatory minimum provisions in place, but raised the threshold to 200 plants. That allows judges to make the decision about jail, based on the circumstances. There is no point -- and considerable expense and risk -- in sending a 19-year-old to prison for half-a-dozen scraggly pot plants.

The Senate amendments also require a cost-benefit review of all minimum sentence provisions after five years. Mandatory minimum sentences in other jurisdictions have produced great leaps in prison populations and no reduction in crime. The government has produced no studies to justify their expansion here.

The senators' amendments are welcome.



© Copyright © The Victoria Times Colonist

[OttCanuk]

I left this comment on that jokers blog site:

December 15th 2009, 8:12am

As usual, only part of the story is being reported. None of us want our children hurt or killed, but you fail to make a fair assessment. While it's true that gangs and organized crime are a danger to our society, the only reason that they are involved in the drug trade are due to it's extremely lucrative nature. If not for prohibition of marijuana and all other illicit drugs, this opportunity would not exist. When's the last time you heard of gangs fighting over booze turf? Also, in regards to the issue of criminals having an out through treatment, treatment is simply not available in many areas of the country. Also, any trafficking charge, which could include passing a joint, will result in exclusion from the treatment provision.

Don

medpot, on Dec 15 2009, 05:51 AM, said:

The Winnipeg Sun

[Afka]

Editor:

Quickly, I'd like to just ask how you think drugs have such a profitable sales price, when their production costs (ex: cannabis) are pennies to the pound, and a pound goes for +-2000$ in Canada, 6000$ in some parts of the US.

I'd like to ask you which criminalizing legislative mechanism allows that massive jump in profit?

Before cannabis, opium, coca were ever made illegal, they were simply plants with very little cash value. If one wanted to consume cocaine, or meth, or heroin, nothing is stopping them at the moment, it's available from unscrupulous dealers in every community.

Imagine if they were legal, cheaply available for addicts (remember, I don't use those drugs, I won't use them if they are legal either, I think others agree with my opinion), quality controlled and kept in safe areas where buyers are carded, unlike now.

I think that would be a step up from leaving production, distribution, marketing and sales to the criminal underworld.

Harper's legislation, harder prohibition, will empower criminal organizations already not afraid of incarceration by removing smaller players who fear mandatory minimums.

But this won't be printed, the 'Peg sun is much too biased.

[medpot]

Newstalk 610 CKTB - St. Catharines, Ontario


Nicholson not happy with Grits!



Tue, 2009-12-15 12:19.
Rick Fleming


Niagara Falls Conservative MP and Justice Minister Rob Nicholson isn't too happy with the federal liberals.

He's upset because the grits have proposed changes to Bill C-15, which targets drug crimes.

Nicholson says illegal drugs are the biggest source of money for gangs and organized crime.

He points out liberal senators have taken away the mandatory penalty for drug producers caught with between five and 200 marijuana plants.

He says this loophole will now allow crooks to grow 100 to 200 marijuana plants in five or six different locations for drug trafficking, without the fear of going to jail.

Each pot plant has a street value of one thousand dollars, meaning a grow-up could produce up to 2 hundred thousand dollars in cash per location to be used to fund criminal activities.

Meanwhile, Niagara regional police are still seeking suspects after finding a massive home-grow operation on Highway 20 (Regional Road 20) in West Lincoln this past Saturday (Dec 12).

11 hundred pot plants, with a street value of one point one million dollars, along with 15 thousand in grow equipment were confiscated.

No one was living in the house... it was strictly being used to grow marijuana.

[medpot]

Newshawk: escapegoat

National Post

Letters to the Editor


Tories ponder proroguing Parliament

Bills would die but Conservatives would gain control of Senate

David Akin, Canwest News Service
Published: Tuesday, December 15, 2009



Jean Levac/Canwest News Service
The Conservatives are set to gain control of the Senate
by early next year.


OTTAWA -- Prime Minister Stephen Harper is being pushed by some of his own advisers to prorogue Parliament next month as the most effective way to win control over the Senate and, ultimately, push ahead with his government's agenda on climate change, justice, and Senate reform.

But the act of prorogation -- the equivalent of hitting the reset button in Ottawa -- would only be the first in a trio of moves as the Conservative government lays out a new policy agenda, one that is likely to be more ambitious because, for the first time since Brian Mulroney was prime minister, the Liberals will no longer have the majority of votes in the upper chamber.

MPs are not due to come back to Parliament until Jan. 25. One scenario under consideration by Harper's inner circle would be for the prime minister to prorogue Parliament a few days before that, have MPs return to Ottawa as planned on Jan. 25, and then quickly roll out a speech from the throne followed by the presentation of the 2010 federal budget -- all before the Winter Olympics get underway in Vancouver on Feb. 12.

Still, if he does choose to prorogue, Mr. Harper would open up himself to some other potential political problems, primarily because prorogation has some similar effects to a general election: it would kill 40 pieces of government legislation -- including the government's own tough new bills on consumer product safety and on harsher sentences for drug traffickers -- and it would disband parliamentary committees.

One important bill for the government -- to extend employment insurance benefits to the unemployed -- was to receive royal assent and become law Tuesday night.

No decision has yet been made by Mr. Harper and his advisers, nor is one likely to be made until well into January, say sources within and outside of government who have some knowledge of the discussions taking place. Those sources would speak only on condition of anonymity.

Andrew MacDougall, a Harper spokesman, said:"We don't indulge the Hill rumour mill. The government's attention remains focused on the priorities of Canadians: protecting the economy by implementing the economic action plan, passing our crime legislation, and protecting families with new consumer safety legislation. The Senate still has a lot of important work to do."

But while much remains to be decided, those sources are nearly unanimous on one point:If he does choose to prorogue, Mr. Harper will not delay Parliament's return on Jan. 25 because he will want to avoid charges that he is attempting to thwart or avoid Parliament or protect Defence Minister Peter MacKay, who is under fire from the opposition on the issue of Afghan detainees.

The key factor driving what will be a holiday season of heavy political strategizing is a historic change of control in the Senate.

When Liberal Senator Jerry Grafstein turns 75 on Jan. 2 and must retire, there will be five vacancies in the Senate, all of which Harper will fill with Conservatives. Harper could announce the names of those new Senators as early as the end of this week, sources say, although he likely will wait until mid-January.

By parliamentary tradition, prime ministers generally do not name senators or make other significant appointments while Parliament is prorogued (although Harper did just that last winter in the midst of the coalition crisis.)

But even though the five new senators will give the Conservatives a 51-49 edge over the Liberals in the Senate, the Liberals will continue to hold on to their majority on Senate committees until the next general election or until Parliament is prorogued.

The Conservatives have been frustrated by Liberal tactics in the Senate and say they will remain so until they can wrest majority control of Senate committees, something they will get if Harper prorogues after the new senators are sworn in.

Ironically, proroguing Parliament would kill the very legislation that the Harper government has been trying to get through the Liberal-controlled Senate.

Since the last throne speech, on Jan. 26, the government has introduced 70 bills in the House of Commons or the Senate but only 30 of them have passed so far.

The 40 bills that would die on the order paper would all have to be re-introduced in the House of Commons and be subject once again to committee hearings by both chambers.

Among the legislation that would die would be bills that bring in free-trade deals with Colombia and Jordan; one that would overhaul the national sex offender registry; one that would end conditional sentencing; and one that would crack down on white collar criminals and online child pornography.

[medpot]

medpot, on Dec 14 2009, 06:30 AM, said:

Not a free pass

The Winnipeg Sun

Wednesday, December 16, 2009

Letter

WATTS' 'JOKE'


Re: 'Not a free pass,' Letters to the editor, Dec. 14.

How exactly do aboriginals not have the same access to drug courts and drug treatment centres as other Canadian citizens?

Is there a "no aboriginals allowed" sign on the front door? That makes no sense. And if you're talking about the disparity of northern reserves not having the ability to provide their citizens with the support they need, then maybe it's time to build them those facilities and provide them with those services instead of changing the law to make it seem like they're better off than they really are.

You say aboriginals are currently convicted at nine times the rate of non-aboriginals but fail to comment on the amount of crimes aboriginals are accused of in relation to their convictions. Instead of working at the community level to determine exactly why aboriginals are convicted of drug offences nine times more than non-aboriginals, Watts wants to change the law, even though that will do nothing to actually solve the problem other than make the numbers look better.

What a joke.

BEN DAVIES

WINNIPEG

And not a funny joke.

[medpot]

The Ottawa Sun

Letters to the Editor: ottsun.oped@sunmedia.ca


Wednesday, December 16, 2009

Letter

Drop bill C-15


If we want to be serious about enacting drug policy to protect young Canadians, we have to reconsider and stop Bill C-15.

The amendments the Senate made to Bill C-15 hardly soften the legislation, especially when considering how many of the committee witnesses called for the bill to be dropped entirely. This is a deeply flawed bill, and if passed into law will force Canada to continue to invest disproportionately in criminally enforcing drug prohibition, instead of investing in a health-based model.

Canadian drug policy is traditionally enacted in the name of protecting youth. This bill will not protect youth from the dangers of drug use or organized crime. Mandatory minimum sentences have shown they do not deter drug use, and drug-free zone policies have shown to be ineffective and expensive. I work with Canadian Students for Sensible Drug Policy, a youth and student run organization telling the government to ‘just say no’ to bad drug policy and drop Bill C-15.

Caleb Chepesiuk

Canadian Students for Sensible Drug Policy

(Glad to see young people getting involved in, and interested in, new legislation)

[medpot]

medpot, on Dec 15 2009, 05:51 AM, said:

'What's their plan?'

The Winnipeg Sun

Letters to the Editor: letters@wpgsun.com

Letter

Thursday, December 17, 2009


CUT JOHN HOWARD FUNDING


Re: 'What's their plan?' Tom Brodbeck, Dec. 13.

Why are tax dollars being used to fund a group committed to the legalization of hard core drugs?

The John Howard Society is a collection of misfits who have been running interference on law and order by advocating for criminals and their lawyers.

If they want to take that position in public that's their right and they are free to do so, but we are not obligated to pay for it.

Use your head for a change and cut their funding Harper, or do you secretly agree with them?

BARRY BANEK

WINNIPEG

Misfits? We don't agree.

[TravE]

Does anyone else think these "law and order" Conservatives had abusive childhoods and have severe issues? Everything is based on having the federal government act as "father" and punish people. Freudian sado-masochistic nonsense, all of it.

[medpot]

The Daily Graphic

Letters to the Editor


Thursday, December 17, 2009


Hoeppner upset about anti-crime bill amendments


Posted By Rob Swystun, The Daily Graphic



Staff photo by Rob Swystun...Portage-Lisgar MP Candice
Hoeppner, left, chats with Portage la Prairie resident
Mary McWhirter at Hoeppner s constituency office along
Saskatchewan Avenue East Wednesday during Tea with
the MP.


Portage-Lisgar MP Candice Hoeppner visited for Christmas Tea in Portage la Prairie on Wednesday and also had a chance to discuss some of her concerns in the matter of getting tough on crime.

Portage-Lisgar Member of Parliament Candice Hoeppner was critical of the Liberal-dominated Senate for making amendments to a conservative anti-crime bill.

Hoeppner said the amendments, made by the Senate's Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee, weakened the bill and undermined the intent of it.

"Our focus and our goal was to crack down on drug traffickers," Hoeppner said of Bill C-15 in an interview just prior to her annual Tea with the MP event in Portage.

Under the legislation, persons found guilty of trafficking who also had previous drug convictions would have received a minimum one-year prison term. With the new amendments of the Senate, mandatory terms would apply only if the offenders had spent a year or more behind bars for their previous conviction.

Hoeppner said the Conservative government aimed to target people who sold drugs to children and the amendments, including taking away mandatory jail time for anyone growing up to 200 marijuana plants, would weaken that aspect of it.


See the full story in The Daily Graphic or subscribe to our full online

edition at http://www.eedition....per/viewer.aspx

rswystun@cpheraldleader.com


Article ID# 2226159

[medpot]

Penticton Western News

Letter to Editor


Bill would unfairly tilt scales of justice



Published: December 17, 2009 6:00 PM


It’s no secret that drug production — most often marijuana grow-ops or meth labs — are a major source of income for the criminal element of our society.

In order to keep up the appearance of being tough on crime, the federal Conservatives are pushing through a bill that would apply stiff mandatory sentences to anyone involved in any scale of grow-op, from a few plants in the basement to major operations involving hundreds of plants.

Nobody wants a marijuana grow-op in their neighbourhood. Often set up in rented homes, they’re messy and destructive to the building they’re set up in. It’s not uncommon for the substandard wiring used to transfer power to those powerful grow lights to cause fires.

Meth labs can be even more destructive. It’s no wonder then that the federal conservatives are trying to push through Bill C-15, which would establish mandatory penalties for serious drug crimes. After all, it looks good on any government’s resumé that they helped in the war on drugs.

But the Conservatives are crying foul after the Liberal-dominated senate amended C-15, removing some of the mandatory sentencing provisions. In particular, they removed the mandatory penalty targeting drug producers caught with between five and 200 marijuana plants.

South of the border, many states have tried mandatory penalties. The penalties haven’t acted as a deterrent and as a result the U.S. now has one of the largest prison populations in the world.

Were C-15 to pass unaltered, as the Conservatives insist it must, it would put someone growing five plants for their personal use on a par with a full-scale grow-op run by organized crime. Yes, both are illegal, but there is a vast difference in both the effect and the scale of the crimes.

And that’s what judges are for; to evaluate all the circumstances of a case and render a sentence appropriate to the crime. Imposing mandatory sentences for minor crimes has only been proven to be good for one thing — filling up jails.

[medpot]

medpot, on Dec 14 2009, 06:30 AM, said:

NOT A 'FREE PASS'

The Winnipeg Sun

Letters to the Editor: letters@wpgsun.com

Friday, December 18, 2009

Letter

WATT STEALING DEMOCRACY


Senator Charlie Watt, how dare you amend a law and base it on race.

This law needs to be struck down immediately. To even be on the books for a single second is a second that spits in the face of Canada and democracy.

A crime is a crime is a crime -- no matter who you are.

To everyone who supports Charlie Watts' amendment to Bill C-15, how dare you?

How dare you vote against Canada, against the people, against democracy, and against our freedoms that so many have sacrificed for.

To the rest of Canada if you value our freedoms, speak up. If you don't speak up, then mark my words, this is the beginning of the end of Canada.

DAVID HANSEN

WINNIPEG

It's two-tier justice no matter how you spin it.

[medpot]

The Toronto Sun

Letters to the Editor: torsun.editor@sunmedia.ca


COLUMN


Shedding some light on our pot laws


By MINDELLE JACOBS

Last Updated: 18th December 2009, 3:24am


The Conservative government and the Liberal-dominated Senate may find this a buzz-kill but a drug expert says neither of their approaches to prosecuting pot producers makes sense.

Earlier this year, MPs passed a drug bill that included a mandatory minimum sentence of six months in jail for growing as few as five pot plants. Drug reform advocates slammed the legislation as draconian. Then the Senate began pruning the bill and just passed an amended version.

The rewritten bill would spare pot growers an automatic jail term unless they're caught cultivating more than 200 plants. The Senate has now punted the legislation back to the House of Commons where it could be gutted and redrafted.

Meanwhile, pot producers will merrily continue running their grow-ops and raking in astronomical amounts of tax-free money, people will continue smoking pot and getting cravings for the munchies and Canadians will continue wondering if all politicians are spaced out.

(In other words, are pot grow-ops a national priority compared to, say, joblessness, a floundering economy, a teetering health-care system or how we're going to afford to repair our crumbling infrastructure?)

But if our politicians insist on focusing on pot grow-ops, our laws should at least reflect the reality of marijuana cultivation.

That is, legislation should be based on the number of lights, not plants, says Darryl Plecas, director of the Centre for Criminal Justice Research at the University of the Fraser Valley.

One 1000-watt bulb will produce a pound of dried bud no matter how many plants you have, he explains. If one grower has one plant under one light, he'll produce one pound of pot. If he's got 16 plants under one light (the typical scenario), he'll still only end up with one pound of bud. The 16 plants just won't grow as high.

Legislation

Growers will simply adjust their cultivation patterns to reflect what's in the legislation, says Plecas. "The Senate could not have gone further to perpetuate the number and problem of grow operations."

Over the next couple of years, growers will just shift the way they operate -- fewer plants but more lights, he explains. "Why would somebody need to have 200 plants?"

And more lights will mean more theft of electricity and an increasing likelihood of fires, says Plecas.

B.C. criminology student and medical marijuana patient Brian Carlisle, who has helped Plecas with his research, began experimenting with plants and light several years ago.

He says he was shocked to find out that it didn't matter how many plants he grew. One bulb over six plants, for instance, produced the same amount of pot as one plant under one bulb. The number of lights, therefore, is the most accurate way to determine the production level of an indoor grow-op, says Carlisle.

"I think (politicians) are being fed incorrect information," he says.

Plecas says the legislation should have ignored the number of plants and set jail terms for more than five lights.

"Once you get beyond five lights ... it's clearly more than can be consumed for personal use."

How times have changed. Remember when a Senate committee recommended that pot be legalized?

mindy.jacobs@sunmedia.ca