Marijuana Grow Ops Raise Cash for Crime

  Marijuana Grow Ops Raise Cash for Crime

Posted by CN Staff on March 05, 2004 at 07:47:12 PT
By Linda Slobodian, Calgary Herald  
Source: Calgary Herald  

It's just pot. An innocent little weed. Really relaxing. Hardly hardcore stuff. And highly recommended for medicinal purposes. Funding police efforts to crack down on marijuana is simply a waste of taxpayers dollars.Those declarations are what devout users -- who may not be looking past the smoke twirling off the end of the joint stuck in their lips -- trot out in their unfaltering, religious-like defence of marijuana.
Others, such as law enforcement officials, grimly view the overall impact of marijuana -- a vital means of providing copious sums of seed money to the organized crime world -- as a poison seeping into the community.They claim its tentacles reach out to cause a ripple effect -- one laced with violence, a glut of other illegal drugs on the streets, a string of diverse criminal activities and, in the end, countless victims and heartbreak.Whatever one believes, there is no disputing the fact a specialized police team is in constant pursuit of illegal marijuana crops sprouting up with a greedy vengeance in homes throughout the city. They simply cannot get to them all.Organized crime groups reap huge profits from low-cost, low-risk marijuana grow operations and use those profits to fund other illegal ventures, such as the production, importation and sale of cocaine, crack and methamphetamine (speed)."Grow operations are a major contributor to financing organized crime," said Calgary Police Service drug unit Staff Sgt. Trevor Daroux, head of the Southern Alberta Marijuana Investigative Team (SAMIT).Complete Title: Marijuana Grow Ops Raise Cash for Crime, and The Ire of Police Snipped:Complete Article: Calgary Herald (CN AB)Author: Linda Slobodian, Calgary Herald Published: Friday, March 05, 2004Copyright: 2004 Calgary HeraldContact: letters theherald.canwest.comWebsite: Articles & Web Sites:Green Tide Shadow Summit News Canadian Links Want Private Sector To Fight Grow-Ops With a Badge'We'll Rally Everybody,' Pot Activist Says of Canadians Inhale Despite Pot Laws 

Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help


Comment #14 posted by afterburner on March 06, 2004 at 04:52:27 PT:

Okay, One More Nit
"About 54 per cent of 2,000 teens aged 12 to 19 years surveyed said they inhaled more than once. Some 34 per cent of 12 to 14-year-olds said they smoked dope. Like tobacco, the smoke injures lung tissue and can cause cancerous tumours."This is another favorite prohibitionist generalization, especially from groups like the British Lung Foundation, which uses DARE-like logic to implicate all plants eventhough the research is based on commercial tobacco with its hundreds of additives.The real facts are never presented in responsible journalistic tradition of balanced reporting: that's our job until the journalists do their job.Cancer facts long suppressed and rarely mentioned, except at websites like Cannabis News and in medical journals:Cannabinoids destroy cancer 27 Feb, 2004 
Research continues to show the amazing anti-cancer effects of cannabis.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #13 posted by Truth on March 05, 2004 at 11:54:38 PT

Right on Kapt'
: )
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #12 posted by kaptinemo on March 05, 2004 at 10:44:27 PT:

All right, I stand corrected
I'll use 'unaugmented' from now on. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #11 posted by FoM on March 05, 2004 at 10:16:12 PT

Thanks! Yuk! I'm sorry I asked! LOL!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #10 posted by goneposthole on March 05, 2004 at 10:14:19 PT

n.The egg or young of a parasitic insect, such as a louse.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by FoM on March 05, 2004 at 10:04:49 PT

I've picked a lot of Nits too afterburner but I don't know what a Nit is! 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by afterburner on March 05, 2004 at 09:55:40 PT:

Poor Journalism: Numbers Don't Add Up
This article is full of the standard prohibitionist lies:"Prized Canadian dope is valued on par with cocaine from the U.S., trading pound for pound at anywhere from $6,000 to $9,000 US, said Calgary police Det. Pat Tetley. That compares with $2,000 Cdn a pound local users pay....Indeed, a lot more than the marijuana is peddled boldly in public places such as Olympic Plaza right under the nose of City Hall. On Calgary streets, marijuana costs $200 to $250 per ounce. Powdered cocaine, crack and methamphetamine all retail at between $80 to $100 per gram."cannabis (C$3200-4000 or U$4220.80-5276 per pound):
[200 X 16 = 3200]
[250 X 16 = 4000]cocaine (C$36480-45600 or U$48117.12-60146.40 per pound):
[80 X 28.5 X 16 = 36480]
[100 X 28.5 X 16 = 45600]The numbers are not even close: "pound for pound" makes a good sound bite, but is poor media fact checking! With cocaine at more that TEN times the price of cannabis, what moron would trade "pound for pound"? And that derogatory term "dope" is another word we love to hate.'Back in the '60s, the THC level of marijuana was at two and three per cent and many of them started using marijuana. The latest statistics -- we have marijuana grown in Alberta that was 35 per cent THC level. You're usually selling on the market now about 10 or 15 per cent. It is now addictive," said Calgary Police Chief Jack Beaton. Despite that, a Health Canada study released last fall discovered that smoking dope is "mainstream" among teenagers -- hitting levels not seen since the 1970s."'There is no scientific evidence that increases in potency make cannabis "addictive." "Addictive" is another smear word used again and again since Emily Murphy wrote the book Black Candle that began cannabis prohibition. [Murphy campaigned against 'marijuana menace' *** ]Okay, I'm done picking nits. Someone else want to give it a try?On a lighter note: "marijuana prohibition" made it into yet another Canadian press story.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by Truth on March 05, 2004 at 09:52:48 PT

When I read about being sober in the dictionary it mentions alcohol, not other drugs. A person smoking pot does not become unsober unless they throw in a few beers.That's why the expression "clean and sober". Clean of drugs, sober of alcohol. Let's not mix terms.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by kaptinemo on March 05, 2004 at 09:39:41 PT:

Arrrrgh! Quick, where's the eye wash station?
Not because of stoner eye (quite sober, friends) but because I am afraid that the smearing of visual bull manure I just read may cause irreparable damage to the ol' corneas.Ms. Slobodian, like all the antis so far during their propaganda assault, has neglected to mention three simple facts: 1) The drug trade before prohibition was vastly less profitable - and therefore, less violent - than when the laws prohibiting it came into effect. 2) Those groups that have been engaging in violence recently in Canada have been doing so against the 'First Generation' growers, the peaceable Mom & Pops ops who didn't carry sidearms or worse. By muscling them out, the (truly) organized crime perpetrators are ratcheting up the potential for violence.3) That violence often results in the loss of a cop's life, at least one a day. They play the roulette wheel every day, as to their odds, but those odds will now increase in probability of dying. Contrary to what many may think my beliefs are regarding law enforcment, there are lots of good cops out there, and they don't deserve to intersect flying bullets any more than your average cannabist does. But they support the system which endangers their lives. They must for economic reasons. They are forced by the politicians and the economic interests backing prohibition to be in close quarters with what amounts to be a wildly unpredictable killer. Any wonder why they have such hair-triggers?As the old saying goes, "There are none so blind as those who *will not* see." Ms. Slobodian needs to remove the self-applied blindfold emblazoned with the anti's trademark stamp and have a look around at what her unthinking support of the present regime truly 'hath wrought'.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by delariand on March 05, 2004 at 09:11:29 PT

The author makes a valid point
Illegal drug grow operations fund crime. Now, here's the trick kiddies. When a prohibitionist reads that sentence, they see the word 'drug', but when I read it I see the word 'illegal'... when was the last time alcohol funded crime? Gee, it's been so long I can't even remember the last time that happened... oh wait... wasn't it prohibition? So hold on, let me connect the dots here. Alcohol never funded crime until it was illegal, and then once it was re-legalized and legitimate industry took over, prices fell and the profits stopped going to crime. Now, you tell me drugs are funding crime... and you want to solve the problem how?Anything starting to sink in yet? Wake up, realize, re -legalize. Just like alcohol, marijuana was around long before some busybodys decided it was evil, and I'm inclined to believe that drug prohibition and alcohol prohibition have a lot in common. Aren't we supposed to learn from the mistakes of our past?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by goneposthole on March 05, 2004 at 08:41:17 PT

must be
a direct pipeline of John Ashcroft's excess bile directly to the Calgary Herald.Back in the late eighties, I had a source of some real good cannabis from a retired policeman.If that's a crime, I'll catch a rotten egg barehanded and scream, "I'm a sh!tduck wizard" from where I am all the way to Timbuktu.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by Virgil on March 05, 2004 at 08:18:01 PT

It is simply simple. It is also stupidly stupid.
Funding police efforts to crack down on marijuana is simply a waste of taxpayers dollars.Enforcing a failed and unjust prohibition also makes a waste of people's lives over something many would think to be an unalienable right, especially since Miracleplant might prevent some things like cancer and neurological damage. The criminals are in the government and not on the end of what should have always been the legal end of a joint.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by Dankhank on March 05, 2004 at 08:04:57 PT

What It's Really All About ...
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by mamawillie on March 05, 2004 at 07:58:20 PT

*****ROLLING EYES*******
[ Post Comment ]

  Post Comment