New Canadian Justice system hanges

[Hakkola]

As Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn declared, "Everyone is guilty of something or has something to conceal. All one has to do is look hard enough to find what it is." Likewise, in Friedrich Dürrenmatt's novella "Traps," which involves a seemingly innocent man put on trial by a group of retired lawyers in a mock-trial game, the man inquires what his crime shall be. "An altogether minor matter," replies the prosecutor. "A crime can always be found."


http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Pri...ven-if/127461/

Not having it affect you is a pretty shitty excuse and doesn't indicate the rightness, or wrongness of the laws in away way.

[ZenOps]

Caffeine is too expensive nowadays. Coffee has tripled over 200% in the last two years. Oh how I miss the days when I could go into Starbucks and get a decent coffee for $3 (which is of course, only about 7 grams or two tablespoons of ground coffee and hot water)

Marijuana is actually cheap by comparison. About $80/pound in Mexico. Quality black peppercorn is more expensive nowadays (and used to be snorted by royalty just like cocaine is now - history chimein.)

A few more jailcells would be a prudent thing to do, there are many many many penniless Detroit, NY, and LA mortgage defaulters who are going to be invading Mexico and Canada soon.

[Modelexis]

Originally posted by Vagabond142
So let me say it again: If you're going to grow weed to sell, then yes, you should do the time for the crime

Would you explain to me how selling a product in a mutually beneficial manner, with no victim is any different from two men getting married with mutual benefits for each of them? both parties agree upon the transaction, no other parties are involved. Or if i turn my basement into a greenhouse and grow tulips for my neighbors in exchange for a bottle of their homemade wine? What if I harvest my own mold from various sources and cut holes in the walls of my home and grow it into the foundation of my house?
If I offered to cut your grass in exchange for a pint of gasoline, which I take home and sniff because I like to get high? who are you to dictate my life?
Neither of these transactions should concern you and none of them affect you.

[derpderp]

Originally posted by Modelexis


There is only a million and one ways to inspect a home for mold and damage from growing plants.
What If you buy a house that was used as an indoor green house to grow tulips?
Would you want to send that person to prison as well?

Your argument evaporates when you put 2 seconds of thought into it. If you use your brain and think logically it really goes a long way.

Uh, now jail is a bit harsh but I don't know if a indoor greenhouse to grow anything is particularly legal and if it causes the house to become damaged and mold then the individual shouldn't be permitted to do it, even if it is their property.

A detached greenhouse would be the solution.

I could also burn my house down, its mine, who cares, but that does effect the community and so does condemned houses with serious structure damage.

[Modelexis]

Originally posted by derpderp


Uh, now jail is a bit harsh but I don't know if a indoor greenhouse to grow anything is particularly legal and if it causes the house to become damaged and mold then the individual shouldn't be permitted to do it, even if it is their property.

A detached greenhouse would be the solution.

So if they shouldn't be allowed to do it, what should the punishment be for disobeying the law?

[Modelexis]

Ill respond to your edit as well.

ruining your own property is one thing, burning down the entire neighborhood is another, please be serious with your arguments.
Do I go to jail if I smoke in bed and torch my house by accident?

[derpderp]

Originally posted by Modelexis


So if they shouldn't be allowed to do it, what should the punishment be for disobeying the law?

If it isn't your property and its a rental, civil court and possibly a charge of property damage before the law.

If it is your own property, then getting your house condemned for obvious reasons would seem like a punishment enough in itself.

[Modelexis]

Originally posted by derpderp


If it isn't your property and its a rental, civil court and possibly a charge of property damage before the law.

If it is your own property, then getting your house condemned for obvious reasons would seem like a punishment enough in itself.

So you agree with me, growing mj in the house you own shouldn't be illegal, right?
My ruined property should be punishment enough!
We're starting to think alike.

[derpderp]

Originally posted by Modelexis


So you agree with me, growing mj in the house you own shouldn't be illegal, right?
My ruined property should be punishment enough!
We're starting to think alike.

I never disagreed, I already said I didn't agree with the increase in drug punishments and if I had the decisions to my whole self marijuana would be legal. But if a person is doing something to a property they own that is causing structural damage to the point the house gets condemned then once again that seems like enough of a punishment to me, it isn't like loosing a house you own would be a insignificant thing to deal with.

[Modelexis]

ahh shucks, I thought you were a law humping statist...
We'll, that's no fun!
haha

[Modelexis]

Originally posted by Vagabond142
Fine line, I know, but that's my opinion.

If nothing else, I praise you for your honesty.

[Idratherbsidewayz]

Detention Without Charge

Title: Combating Terrorism Act

What’s new: The proposal would revive certain expired aspects of the Anti-Terrorism Act, which was passed in 2001 in the wake of the September 11 attacks.

What’s in it: The key aspects of this bill involve investigative hearings, so-called “preventative arrests,” and detention without charge. The new bill would allow police and prosecutors to bring a person before a court and compel them to disclose information related to possible terrorism, even if that person has not been charged. That investigative hearing could be held in secret. “Preventative arrest” would allow people to be arrested without warrant under the belief that the arrest will disrupt terrorist activity and prevent a looming attack. The bill also permits detention for three days without charge — 48 hours longer than what is currently on the books. Conditions can be imposed on that person’s release, and if he or she fails to comply, they could be jailed for up to a year. The bill would be up for review within five years of passage.

The buzz: Justice Minister Rob Nicholson said last year that the provisions are “necessary to protect our country from the threat of terrorism,” and the government points out that investigative detention powers were upheld by the Supreme Court. Queen’s University law professor Don Stuart said “there’s not much evidence that they’re needed or that they work,” and that “anything to do with secrecy should be challenged.”

I have a serious problem with this passing. Stories from my parents youth in Communist Poland parallel this law in a disturbing manner. Terrorism is so ambiguous, you would be able to jail a lot of people you wanted gone.

As Hakk reiterated: "A crime can always be found."

Cyber Investigation

Title: Investigative Powers for the 21st Century Act

What’s new: The act broadly updates current legislation to cover Internet and computer communications, and extends police authority to obtain certain communications data.

What’s in it: The new bill would allow police to demand that a telecommunications service provider preserve computer data — even without a court order. Beyond that, Joseph Di Luca, a criminal lawyer and vice-president of the Criminal Lawyers Association, said “it looks like the standard required for making this demand is not the usual ‘reasonable and probable grounds,’ but the lower standard of ‘reasonable suspicion.” The bill also creates two new types of judicial orders, including one that allows police to obtain “transmission data.” This means police could find out the date, destination, time, and duration of a communication, although in principle they cannot obtain the content of the communication. The new bill would also make it illegal to make “hate material available online, by creating a hyperlink that directs web surfers to a website where hate material is posted.” It would also become illegal to possess a computer virus for the sake of committing mischief.

The buzz: “Legislation must be modernized in order to keep pace with modern communications technology and give investigators the tools they need,” the Justice Department said in a press release last year. But Shawn Vulliez, a spokesperson for the Pirate Party online privacy advocacy group, recently wrote in a National Post editorial that “every single thing Canadians do online will be monitored” and that the “cost of this monitoring will be added to our Internet bills.”

I'm not down with how this could be used against you if ever you happened to be in court for whatever reason. Hopefully somebody develops a tool to maintain privacy from this government snooping.


Combine these two laws and you can pretty much put anybody away for whatever reason you want.

[Sugarphreak]

...

[ZenOps]

Pre-emptively detaining "suspected" terrorists is definitely a police state type of thing.

I'd be proud to be labelled a terrorist by Rob Anders. Just like that Nobel peace price winner thats in jail, you can't always be friends with local government officials (Even though I do believe that Nobel winner does deserve to be in jail)

Pastor Dowell is coming for you Rob!

[Ergo-Sun-Tzu]

Originally posted by ZenOps
Pre-emptively detaining "suspected" terrorists is definitely a police state type of thing.

I'd be proud to be labelled a terrorist by Rob Anders. Just like that Nobel peace price winner thats in jail, you can't always be friends with local government officials (Even though I do believe that Nobel winner does deserve to be in jail)

Pastor Dowell is coming for you Rob!

If I had a nickle for everytime you said Rob Anders.

[Sugarphreak]

...

[Feruk]

Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz

I have a serious problem with this passing. Stories from my parents youth in Communist Poland parallel this law in a disturbing manner. Terrorism is so ambiguous, you would be able to jail a lot of people you wanted gone.

As Hakk reiterated: "A crime can always be found."

I'm not down with how this could be used against you if ever you happened to be in court for whatever reason. Hopefully somebody develops a tool to maintain privacy from this government snooping.

Combine these two laws and you can pretty much put anybody away for whatever reason you want.

My thoughts exactly. Everyone else is focusing on the meaningless drug ones and missing the scary ones. They can hold you for no reason for 72 hours, then release you on imposed conditions (which if you break you can spend a year in jail for) without EVER even being charged with a crime!! That's insane!

I also find the one about suing terrorist supporters laughable. How can you ever hope to enforce that using Canadian law? Nobody outside Canada's gonna care.

[Xtrema]

This is expected. Big prison, Big business, no abortion, no drugs, internet bandwidth will be capped, ending public broadcasting, immigration will be tightened, this is exactly what CPC bring to the table in a majority. Yet people are stupid enough to vote NDP instead of Liberals and give a majority to the CPC.

Complain all you want, you can do dick all until the next election.

[ZenOps]

I think what will shock more people is the internet tracking legislation.

Yeah, probably a good idea to give up the questionable porn and nuclear weaponry google searches.

Dambit.

[LollerBrader]

Originally posted by derpderp


Uh, now jail is a bit harsh but I don't know if a indoor greenhouse to grow anything is particularly legal and if it causes the house to become damaged and mold then the individual shouldn't be permitted to do it, even if it is their property.

A detached greenhouse would be the solution.

The problems with a grow op arise from two factors: Measures to conceal, and the scale of a commercial operation.

Someone growing their own lettuce isn't likely to be growing as intensively as an MJ OP, plus they'd be able to do normal venting of moisture.

Simply put, the house damage arises from the illegality.