|
|
| Legalized Marijuana Bill Doomed |
|
Posted by FoM on April 17, 2002 at 10:51:52 PT By Peter O'Neil, Vancouver Sun Source: Canada.com 
A B.C. MP's bill aimed at decriminalizing marijuana possession is expected to be killed today by a so-called "poison pill" amendment by the Liberal government.The amendment, if passed, will kill Canadian Alliance MP Keith Martin's bill even though an all-party, Liberal-controlled committee agreed last year that it would go to a vote. Martin, a medical doctor, is one of the few MPs who has been able to get a private bill into the House of Commons for a scheduled vote. Under a complicated lottery system, only a handful of the hundreds of private bills ever make it that far. He used the opportunity to advance a cause recently endorsed by the Canadian Medical Association -- that those caught with small amounts of marijuana be subjected to tickets and fines, but not criminal prosecution and a record. Martin said decriminalization would free up the police and courts to deal with more serious drug-related offences. "This bill would save Canada $150 million every year, as well as freeing manpower and resources within the police," he said. But Martin's bill is expected to be stopped in its tracks today as a result of a Liberal amendment that was tabled shortly after former Justice Minister Anne McLellan was replaced in January by Martin Cauchon. While McLellan had urged a public debate on marijuana decriminalization, Cauchon said he wouldn't entertain any changes in Canada's pot laws because Canadians wouldn't support such measures. Liberal MPs are being urged to vote in favour of a government amendment that would remove Martin's bill from the order paper, but would at the same time refer the issues raised in his legislation to an existing special committee now studying the non-medical use of drugs. Government House leader Ralph Goodale said if Martin's bill passed second reading today unchanged, it would go to the justice committee for study. Then the House of Commons would have two groups of MPs studying the same issue. While Goodale said he's been on the job only four months and couldn't respond to charges the tactic is unprecedented, he said the procedure is legal and is simply intended to avoid parliamentary bottlenecks. "It's not denying the rights of private members, not at all," Goodale said Tuesday. But opposition MPs urged "cowering" Liberal backbenchers to join with other parties in defending the rights of ordinary parliamentarians against Chretien's manoeuvres. Martin said government and opposition MPs currently have 239 bills before the House under a private member's process estimated by the Canadian Alliance to cost $45 million a year. None of the bills have made it to the Commons for a vote and only three private bills from the Senate have passed. The three involved symbolic or trivial matters such as the creation of a parliamentary poet laureate and the designation of a national horse of Canada. "None of the private member's business that is substantive, productive, or important to Canadians is even allowed to get on the floor of the House of Commons," Martin told reporters. "Canada is becoming a dictatorship." Other MPs agreed, saying the Liberal government is taking an an unprecedented step to stifle parliamentary democracy. MPs, who have had the ability since the mid-1980s to occasionally send their own bills to the Commons for a vote, have effectively lost that right, said veteran New Democratic Party House leader Bill Blaikie. "This is a very, very bad precedent," said Blaikie. "Whenever the government doesn't want something to come to a vote, it can use its majority to overcome private members' business. This indeed will be a sad day for parliamentary democracy." Tory House leader Peter MacKay said Prime Minister Jean Chretien, already accused of wielding dictatorial powers over Parliament, is destroying one of the few ways MPs can advance the views of their region. "This is a major step backward. It kills the ability of members of Parliament to do work on behalf of their constituents and on behalf of their country and province," MacKay said. 'Poison pill' amendment expected to kill B.C. MP's private bill Related Articles & Web Site: Canadian Links Legalize Pot, Travelling Committee Told Canada Legalizes Marijuana For Medicinal Purposes Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help |
 |
|
Comment #14 posted by herbman on April 19, 2002 at 10:55:37 PT:
|
| The constant battery of marijuana and the measures to legalize it really upsets me. Alchohol is a drug that was prohibited. Thanks to Al Capone and some of the Kennedys alchohol is now legal to anyone 21 years of age and up.but do you know why? Simply because of a tiny thing we like to call MONEY !The reason the U.S.government puts billions of dollars and hundreds of hours of man power into the war against drugs is because they don't get a piece of the action. The tobacco industry kills thousands of peolpe each year, you've seen the commercials, you've heard all the facts but why ? Its very simple, every year come tax season they get a large sum of money from the tobacco industry, from beer companies, but what they are really craving for is the real money. If marijuana were legalized can you imagine the tax money they could pump out a year. Most people don't have a problem paying $50.00 dollars for a small bag of chronic. Marijuana has more uses than just smoking and above that is an unbeatable market force. I truly hope that we see marijuana legalized in the future. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #13 posted by FoM on April 17, 2002 at 22:31:58 PT |
| Such creativity! Never would have thought of it like that. At my age I'd be happy with expanding web surfing! Just kidding but not really. Those were the days my friend I thought they's never end! They did a million years ago. LOL! [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #12 posted by firedog on April 17, 2002 at 22:07:35 PT |
| Expands the mind, either way! [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #11 posted by FoM on April 17, 2002 at 19:27:15 PT |
| Thank you. If you would want to do something it would be very kind. If you do maybe it could be sent to Mark Greer at Mapinc. and he could send it to me then. Someone asked me in an email and I'm not comfortable giving out my home address and I think we all understand fear so maybe Mark could help and he has my home address. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #10 posted by FoM on April 17, 2002 at 19:20:34 PT |
| Here's a link that is helping me understand about satelitte connections. We have Direct TV and have since 94. I would be able to get 2 channels without a satellite. We'd get channel 7 and 9 and only one of them good. I would have gone crazy without a satellite. It works great and only goes off for a few minutes during heavy rain storms. Crystal clear picture too. Check it out. What an age of technology we live in. Having the web pages you visit beamed to and back from a satellite that is over 23,000 miles in space is something and we like space things ya know! http://www.americansatellite.com/internet/compare.asp?SID=JDDEXG3001850ICHTKBMNI8LOZFEDTH28 [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #9 posted by Shishaldin on April 17, 2002 at 18:49:16 PT |
| ...of data, that is! Good to hear that you're getting SAT broadband relatively soon, FoM! It makes anything you do online that much more fun and stress-free. If I'm addicted to anything, it's gotta be to my DSL line at home. I know you're spending some $$$ for the SAT hookup. Want some help? I know a few CNews regulars said they were ready to pony up some cash to help out. My tax preparer did REALLY well by me this year and I've got some extra bux to give to *worthy causes*.... Where do I send the check? peace and strength, Shishaldin ps Free Tuck and Kubby!!! If you've got extra bux, help Steve Kubby out (I had just sent a contribution to them the night before his arrest!): Kubby Defense Fund 32545 B Golden Lantern, Suite 101 Dana Point, CA 92629 Does anyone know where to send $$$ for Steve Tuck? [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #8 posted by FoM on April 17, 2002 at 18:07:13 PT |
| The one I got is called a two way DSS. I talked to Ron Bennett a few weeks ago and we talked about satellites, cable modems etc. He told me to get a two way not a one way. I will not need a phone line except for the tech to hook me up. I won't know how to act and I know it will be much easier to do so much more. I can only do work on my web pages at night and during the day it is horrible how slow and so much lag time I have when trying to go from web site to web site. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #7 posted by Elfman_420 on April 17, 2002 at 17:41:37 PT |
| Yes, satellite will bypass the phone jack, but you would still have an "ISP" (Internet Service Provider), but it wouldn't be a phone company. You would need to put up a satellite on your roof and have something similar to a "cable modem" in your house to plug your computer into. Unfortunately, satellite modem doesn't mean you can have a special card on your laptop and be connected to the internet anywhere, but I might assume that you could take the satellite to anywhere that gets reception and set it up. The best thing to do is get DSL or Cable, but you usually have to be within a certain distance of the DSL or Cable company to get either (which won't be the case in the future). With DSL, you would still use the phone line, but it wouldn't tie up your phone line (you can be on the internet and the phone still works normally). Hope this helps. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #6 posted by DdC on April 17, 2002 at 14:34:49 PT |
| I was wondering about a satellite. Does this mean bypassing a phone line? If I could go online without a phone jack I could be almost anywhere, regardless of connections...
Or is it something else and still requires the isp and phone? DdC [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #5 posted by FoM on April 17, 2002 at 13:45:12 PT |
| I just ordered it. I talked to Mark Greer the other day about his satellite and he seems happy with his and this is insane to have to spend a whole day getting around the internet when I could do more. I barely update my web pages because it takes too long and it's time to be efficient. I am getting the 2 way satellite which takes an FCC licensed technican to install and that can take a month but at least it will be here and working soon. I have a good computer so I can't wait until I can do more like joining newsgroups and things I couldn't do with this connection. I hate spending the money but don't we all. I think I'll be happy. I know I'll be happy actually. I need to do more. I'm not very patient these days. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #4 posted by Hope on April 17, 2002 at 13:26:37 PT |
| This article is just revealing another example of the same roadblocks used by the treasonous criminals presently in power. They used to tell us, "If you don't like the laws, then change them!", but they do every scummy thing they can do to see that we don't. What's the message of this sort of tyrannical, dictatorial politics? They are crooked as snakes! Worthless scoundrels and power freaks! They are despisers of democracy. They create disrespect for the rule of law. They are like "white washed sepulchers! Clean and white on the outside, but inside, full of death and corruption!" [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #3 posted by Hope on April 17, 2002 at 13:24:48 PT |
| I hope it works to your, and our, advantage. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #2 posted by FoM on April 17, 2002 at 11:31:18 PT |
| I just want to say that I am ordering a satellite today. I've checked every possible way for me to speed up my connection and the only one available in our very rural area is a satellite. Because it cost a lot of money we thought about it for awhile but the fact is I could do so much more then I can and we decided it was necessary. We need to win this drug war and I need speed to be able to contribute in a timely fashion. Thank you for being patient with my slow speed. It might be a month until it's installed they said but maybe it won't take that long and then the sky's the limited! [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #1 posted by FoM on April 17, 2002 at 10:54:30 PT |
| Source: Vancouver Sun (CN BC) Author: Peter O'Neil, Vancouver Sun Published: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 Copyright: 2002 The Vancouver Sun Contact: sunletters@pacpress.southam.ca Website: http://www.canada.com/vancouver/vancouversun/ [ Post Comment ] |
| Post Comment |  |
 |  |